OT: Kind of, regarding airline food
kilikini
bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
food.
Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
Suppose you fly from New York to Los Angles, you have a short lay-over in
Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending is?
Up to 8 hours? With no food?
I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
kili
kilikini
"kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
Okay, I'm replying to my own post; it's no liquids that are allowed on a
plane! That includes, lip gloss, soda, lip stick, foundation make up, etc.
I guess crackers are okay. Gee, that's swell.
kili
Andy
2006, typed out:
Where will it end before the skies are simply empty due to travel
restrictions?
It seems the terrorists have accomplished one objective, keeping us
grounded and afraid to travel. A "Do not disturb" tactic!
Where WILL it end?
America is taking rediculous measures!!! I doubt our friends across the
pond have it this bad!
I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero carry-
ons???
The next step is a Customs check on domestic flights! Mark my words!!!
It's gonna bankrupt the airline industry.
Don't get me started!
Andy
Wayne Boatwright
Yeah, as we choke to death on the cracker dust for lack of liquid.
Flying used to be a pleasure. At best, now, it's an unpleasant means to
an end. I have no desire to fly.
--
Wayne Boatwright
__________________________________________________
Has all we've learned been wrong?
Chatty Cathy
that's ridiculous...
Seriously, only thing I can think of is that they are afraid of anything
that can be brought on board as two or more "harmless" components, that
if mixed together can go "boom". Sigh. Makes you wonder what the world
is coming to, doesn't it?
The good news is: all the domestic flights I have been on here *do*
serve a "snack" - and they give you soft drinks as well. I think you can
get booze too, but I have never bothered to ask. Depends on the airline
whether you have to pay for the food and drink or whether it is included
in the price of the ticket.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy
Nancy Young
"kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote
> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
> Suppose you fly from New York to Los Angles, you have a short lay-over in
> Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
> annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending
> is?
> Up to 8 hours? With no food?
I only recently flew from Newark to Las Vegas, a 5 hour or so flight,
they surely did serve food. Given the circumstances, I am sure they
will compensate, and if you're sitting there dying for food, they'll come up
with something.
> I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
> need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
> thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
We're just going to have to deal. The airlines will deal, and we'll deal.
nancy
Al Reid
> Oh pshaw, on Fri 11 Aug 2006 04:06:37a, kilikini meant to say...
>
>
>
> Flying used to be a pleasure. At best, now, it's an unpleasant means to
> an end. I have no desire to fly.
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright
> __________________________________________________
>
> Has all we've learned been wrong?
>
I'm going to be flying in the near future. I used to fly all of the time (before 9/11). your statement "At best, now, it's an
unpleasant means to an end." reminds me of the lyrics to Harry Chapin's song Greyhound: "Its got to be the going, not the getting
there, that's good."
My flight is just a little over 2 hrs and I think I can get by without a drink. It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting passenger carry-on.
--
Al Reid
Nancy Young
"Al Reid" <are...@reidDASHhome.com> wrote
> It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
> have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting passenger
> carry-on.
That's correct. The airline will have their own (I imagine)
screened beverages, etc. And I've always been able to order
a free soda or water.
nancy
Nancy Young
"Chatty Cathy" <cath...@mailinator.com> wrote
> Good heavens lip stick???? I have heard of "this is a stick-up" but that's
> ridiculous...
Surely you can see how plastic explosives could be made
to mimic lipstick?
nancy
jmcquown
Virtually all liquids are banned from being carried aboard by passengers.
These include:
. Drinks -- even those you buy in the airport - so you are relegated to
airline coffee
. Toothpaste
. All perfume
. All shampoos and conditioners and other liquid hair products
. Suntan lotion and the like
Here's what's allowed:
. Baby formula - although you will be asked to drink some of it before it's
allowed through, according to media reports
. Medications - but these will be inspected
I'm going to have to take a larger suitcase because I can't put any personal
care items in my carry-on.
Jill
jmcquown
Interestingly enough, last week before this happened they were showing some
things on the news which don't appear to be weapons but are. One was a
"lipstick" but when you crank it up, it's actually a 3 inch blade.
Jill
Wayne Boatwright
> "Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns981C2E70B41D3wa...@217.22.228.19...
>> Oh pshaw, on Fri 11 Aug 2006 04:06:37a, kilikini meant to say...
>>
>>
>> Yeah, as we choke to death on the cracker dust for lack of liquid.
>>
>> Flying used to be a pleasure. At best, now, it's an unpleasant means
>> to an end. I have no desire to fly.
>>
>> --
>> Wayne Boatwright
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> Has all we've learned been wrong?
>>
>
> I'm going to be flying in the near future. I used to fly all of the
> time (before 9/11). your statement "At best, now, it's an unpleasant
> means to an end." reminds me of the lyrics to Harry Chapin's song
> Greyhound: "Its got to be the going, not the getting there, that's
> good."
Ah, yes, I remember that one. I Like Harry Chapin.
> My flight is just a little over 2 hrs and I think I can get by without a
> drink. It's not clear, however, that the airline will not have
> beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting passenger
> carry-on.
Yes, pre 9/11 I used to fly frequently, some for business but mostly for
pleasure. IMHO, the whole business of flying has become an unpleasant and
unsettling experience. It used to be fun and exciting.
The airines will have beverages. The restriction is *anything* carried by
passengers. Wonder what they do aboutr vials of insulin and syringes?
Andy
2006, typed out:
> I'm going to have to take a larger suitcase because I can't put any
> personal care items in my carry-on.
The local news had some ladies at the airport crying bloody murder about
no make-up.
Here's my dream solution:
Andy
Melba's Jammin'
"kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
> food.
> kili
Wrong. No liquids, gel substances, maybe others. Computers and other
electronics are ok. Handbag ok. Dunno about food in general.
George
> America is taking rediculous measures!!! I doubt our friends across the
> pond have it this bad!
>
Korea has done it for years. When you board any domestic flight you must
check all of your bags.
> I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero carry-
> ons???
When you have "peace loving people" trying to kill everyone who doesn't
believe in their ways you need to think differently.
Vilco
>> I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero
>> carry- ons???
> When you have "peace loving people" trying to kill everyone who
> doesn't believe in their ways you need to think differently.
And the sorriest part of it all is, here in Europe, islam's total immunity
to any criticism.
Why are all these european assholes insulting christianity and hebraism and
never saying zero about islam? It would be ridiculous, if it wasn't so
dangerous.
We should get rid of a good bunch of friggin' leftwingers and remove theyr
brainwashing from Europe. Remember that european survey in 2004 which showed
that almost 90% of europeans think Israel is the cause of middle-east wars?
It's ridiculous, it's pure left-wing-induced misinformation: nobody here
remembers that Siria, Egipt and Jordan were all armed with russian tanks,
nobody never speaks of no single missile being fired from south-lebanon
against israel, nobody. Here they're all pointing theyr stupid finger
against Israel.
When USofA went in Afghanistan, these monkeys yelled against USofA for going
there and the UK for having "ruined Afghanistan with colonialism", and
nobody said nothing about the friggin Resoviet army invading Afghanistan
from 1979 to 1989 (stopping only due to financial breakdown).
I'm very deluded of europeans ATM, and sadly I'm an european, too.
--
Vilco
Think pink, drink rose'
jacqui{JB}
news:XoGdnQkx_sUi6kHZ...@adelphia.com...
> Korea has done it for years. When you board any
> domestic flight you must check all of your bags.
I flew from Seoul to Busan two years ago; cabin baggage was fine. Has it
changed since then? Or did you fly on a particularly small plane?
-j
jacqui{JB}
news:ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline
> restrictions. You can't bring a carry-on on the
> plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer,
> no food.
Things are rather chaotic right now; I expect that to change as threats are
further investigated. In the meantime, a couple of links which may help:
http://www.baa.com/alert_media.html -- from Heathrow's website re current
restrictions
http://makeashorterlink.com/?I35912A8D -- from American Airlines re current
restrictions
Notably: "Customers may carry-on approved electronic devices such as
personal computers, electronic games, and cell phones, except when traveling
from or thru the United Kingdom."
But please, people, don't spread rumors: get your information from the TSA
or the airport or airline you plan to travel with -- they should have the
latest and greatest (?) information.
I'm scheduled to go to London in a couple of weeks. While I'm incredibly
irritated by the no-hand-baggage (what about my book?!?) and no-liquids
(i.e. my beloved bottle of water), I'll be damned if "terrorists" are gonna
keep me at home. I urge you to make your own reasoned risk-assessments, and
keep flying if you can manage it.
If they scare us into changing in negative ways, they win.
-j
Chatty Cathy
seen that's what I was getting at. I assumed that something "dangerous"
could be put into a bottle and passed off as something "harmless" - and
that's what they are trying to prevent.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy
The Bubbo
I think we have to wait a couple weeks for the dust to settle on this one.
Right now everything is reactionary and there is no reason to believe all of
these restrictions are permanent.
I fly about 4 or 5 times a year to various places and the thing that's really
really going to irritate me is if I have to check my laptop. The idea of that
getting lost or damaged or stolen irritates me to no end. I have to fly to NYC
in october and hopefully things will be calmer then.
Also, I think the flights themselves are still allowed to serve sodas and
whatnot with your pack of 4 broken pretzels (fat free for extra dryness!!).
--
.:Heather:.
www.velvet-c.com
I thought I was driving by Gettysburg once but it ends up I was just driving
by your mom's house.
MareCat
news:jj_Cg.7156$ID1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> Here's what's allowed:
>
> . Baby formula - although you will be asked to drink some of it before
> it's
> allowed through, according to media reports
Also, expressed breast milk (same deal with drinking it). Luckily, when my
DD was a baby, she'd drink it straight from the tap, so no need to bring the
milk in bottles with me.
Mary
Mordechai Housman
If they extend it to all food, that will be a major problem for many
Jews. Many of us won't eat airline food, even what THEY claim is kosher.
So we MUST bring our own food. On a 12-hour trip, like to Israel, for
example, bringing no food would constitute a major problem.
Mordechai
Mordechai Housman
Sure, didn't you ever see the musical Oklahoma! ? One guy had a little
viewing tube that sprung a knife or some such thing.
Felice Friese
"Nancy Young" <qwe...@monmouth.com> wrote in message
news:ebhqm2$se6$1...@news.monmouth.com...
> We're just going to have to deal. The airlines will deal, and we'll deal.
Precisely. It sure beats exploding over the Atlantic.
Felice
SD
Trust me....you'll survive. I flew back to Honduras yesterday when this
went into effect. (I was in the air between Seattle and Houston when
this broke) At Houston, all liquids and gels were dumped at the gate.
No water bottles, no sodas, no Starbucks, nothing. Only baby formula
and medications. You could bring food yesterday. I brought a bagel with
me. They will serve beverages on the plane.Everything from today onward
had to be in a tranparent plastic bag (that was the word from
Continental Airlines yesterday) and medications/food required for
medical conditions were allowed yesterday after the change went into
effect. Medications need to be in original containers with the patient
name on it. Everything else you would normally carry on has to be in
checked baggage.
SD
SD
Chatty Cathy wrote:
> kilikini wrote:
> > "kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> >> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
> >> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
> >> food.
> >>
> >> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
> >> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
> >> Suppose you fly from New York to Los Angles, you have a short lay-over in
> >> Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
> >> annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending
> > is?
> >> Up to 8 hours? With no food?
> >>
> >> I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
> >> need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
> >> thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
> >>
> >
> > Okay, I'm replying to my own post; it's no liquids that are allowed on a
> > plane! That includes, lip gloss, soda, lip stick, foundation make up, etc.
> >
> > I guess crackers are okay. Gee, that's swell.
> >
> > kili
> >
> >
> Good heavens lip stick???? I have heard of "this is a stick-up" but
> that's ridiculous...
>
Lipstick tubes are the right size for a small detonator for explosives.
Hence no lipstick tubes
SD
SD
I flew yesterday. Yesterday electronics were ok. I was told by the
flight attendants it was a good thing my ticket was for Thursday and
not Friday beacuse they had been told as of today, only a small
transparent bag with your tickets, medications, id, etc would be
allowed in the cabin. Everything else would have to go into checked
baggage. I flew the 1240 am flight from Seattle to San Pedro Sula
yesterday - 8 hours of this nonsense. Food was served wih beverages and
then there was a separate beverage service after the meal was finished.
SD
Chatty Cathy
>
> Lipstick tubes are the right size for a small detonator for explosives.
> Hence no lipstick tubes
Well, lets hope the "dust settles" soon. Thank goodness no lives were
lost and the authorities caught the "suspects" in time. But the chaos at
the airports must be giving "them" much satisfaction. The b@%$#&ds.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy
SD
It really wasn't chaos yesterday. The news is making more of it than
what really happened at the airport, at least the airports I went
through, yesterday. Chaos occurs when you get a bunch of idiots who
decide they don't want to comply with the change and cause problems.
Most people watched the news at the airport and then just dumped the
stuff that would cause problems at check points. The first suspect was
arrested before I left Seattle and things were as they always were at
security. I went through with my shampoo, toothpaste and a jar of
homemade raspberry jam in the carry on. The rest were arrested while I
was in the air and when we got to Houston, the changes went into
effect. A friend who got on in Houston had to dump her
non-prescription cough medicine. I never left the secure area so my
stuff was untouched and I came home with everthing I started with. At
the checkpoints, most people just dumped their stuff in the garbage
cans with no real big hassle. But, like anywhere, there are always a
few jerks to cause problems.
SD
Gregory Morrow
kilikini wrote:
> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
> food.
> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
That's only for UK -emanating flights. Electronics, etc. are still okay for
US domestic flights...
According to the TSA the US domestic restrictions are for liquids only, not
foods. Food should be okay...
For flights from the USA to the UK per www.britishairways.com :
[...]
"In addition to these restrictions, the airline has decided that no hand
baggage will be allowed in the cabin on inbound British Airways' flights to
the UK from the USA to speed up the departure process from the USA."
[...]
I can't find any similar carry - on restrictions for UK - bound flights on
the United or American sites...apparently these airlines have the same
carry - on policies as always re: their UK - bound flights -- but no
liquids. But since this crisis has started I've noticed the websites of US
airlines have been somewhat slow in posting advice, best to check with the
individual carrier...
Here are the UK restrictions from the British Airports Authority. These are
applicable to ALL flights on ALL airlines departing the UK. Additionally, I
have read on some other boards/groups that carry - ons for US - bound
flights from other European points *may* be restricted at the whim of the
TSA or other security services. One poster mentioned that he saw passengers
yesterday at Stockholm's Arlanda airport checking in for a Newark - bound
Contintal Airlines flight being forced to check most of their carry - ons a
la the UK (Continental was apparently one of the targetted carriers out of
Heathrow; additionally Sweden has a Muslim "problem")...this is apparently
completely random. Here's for the UK:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4778615.stm
"Packing advice for UK passengers
British Airports Authority advice
The Department for Transport has issued advice to air passengers travelling
from the UK after a suspected plot to blow up planes was prevented:
Following this morning's police action, security at all UK airports has
been increased and additional security measures have been put in place for
all flights.
With immediate effect, the following arrangements apply to all passengers
starting their journey at a UK airport and to those transferring between
flights at a UK airport.
All cabin baggage must be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold
of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.
Passengers may take through the airport security search point, in a single
(ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items. Nothing
may be carried in pockets:
Pocket-size wallets and pocket-size purses plus contents (for example money,
credit cards, identity cards etc (not handbags)
Travel documents essential for the journey (for example passports and travel
tickets)
Prescription medicines and medical items sufficient and essential for the
flight (eg, diabetic kit), except in liquid form unless verified as
authentic
Spectacles and sunglasses, without cases
Contact lens holders, without bottles of solution
For those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each
bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger) and sanitary items
sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy
disposal bags)
Female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed
(eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes)
Tissues (unboxed) and/or handkerchiefs
Keys (but no electrical key fobs). All passengers must be hand searched, and
their footwear and all the items they are carrying must be X-ray screened.
Pushchairs and walking aids must be X-ray screened, and only
airport-provided wheelchairs may pass through the screening point.
In addition to the above, all passengers boarding flights to the USA and all
the items they are carrying, including those acquired after the central
screening point, must be subjected to secondary search at the boarding gate.
Extra time
Any liquids discovered must be removed from the passenger.
There are no changes to current hold baggage security measures.
Regrettably, significant delays at airports are inevitable. Passengers are
being asked to allow themselves plenty of extra time and to ensure that
other than the few permitted items listed above, all their belongings are
placed in their hold baggage and checked in.
These additional security measures will make travel more difficult for
passengers, particularly at such a busy time of the year. But they are
necessary and will continue to keep flights from UK airports properly
secure.
We hope that these measures, which are being kept under review by the
government, will need to be in place for a limited period only.
In light of the threat to aviation and the need to respond to it, we are
asking the travelling public to be patient and understanding and to
cooperate fully with airport security staff and the police.
If passengers have any questions on their travel arrangements or security in
place at airports they should contact their airline or carrier."
</>
> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
According to the TSA the US domestic restrictions are for liquids only, not
foods. Food should be okay...
ms_peacock
"Mordechai Housman" <hou...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Jm0Dg.3$df.2@trndny06...
> If they extend it to all food, that will be a major problem for many Jews.
> Many of us won't eat airline food, even what THEY claim is kosher. So we
> MUST bring our own food. On a 12-hour trip, like to Israel, for example,
> bringing no food would constitute a major problem.
>
> Mordechai
You won't die in 12 hours without food. Really. The restrictions are for
liquids anyway, not food.
Ms P
Bookwyrm
Today's Strib said no food.
In the UK they're taking it seriously.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778615.stm
'wyrm
Gregory Morrow
Nancy Young wrote:
> I only recently flew from Newark to Las Vegas, a 5 hour or so flight,
> they surely did serve food.
Was this Continental? AFAIK they are still the only airline in the US
serving meals in Coach...I see them getting fairly decent reviews for their
food on some of the travel sites.
JetBlue offers plenty of snacks (unlimited!) on their flights, as does
apparently Southwest on their longer and trans - con flights...
Given the circumstances, I am sure they
> will compensate, and if you're sitting there dying for food, they'll come
up
> with something.
Doubtful...still best to take your own along.
Regarding "compensation" of a slightly different sort, someone on IIRC
www.flyertalk.com mentioned that they had trip cancellation insurance with
American Express (this I guess is an automatic perk of having an Amex card).
They were supposed to transit at Heathrow to Amsterdam and then back to the
US (after completing a European cruise). Their Heathrow - Amsterdam flight
was of course cancelled, they were going to have to spend an extra day or
two in getting flights, etc. They called Amex to ask about their trip
insurance, asking them to pay for a hotel and other expenses. Amex refused,
saying that under the policy's "force majeure" clause this interruption was
defined as "terrorism" and Amex was not liable for any costs incurred by
the traveller :-|
During this whole terrrorism fracas airlines are NOT responsible for putting
passengers up in hotels, providing meals, alternative transportation, phone
calls, etc. .They are simply responsible for eventually getting you to your
final destination on "the next available flight"...if they offer anything it
is simply a courtesy extended on their part.
Fore - warned is fore - armed :-)
--
Best
Greg
-L.
kilikini wrote:
> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
> food.
>
> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
> Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
> annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending is?
> Up to 8 hours? With no food?
>
> I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
> need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
> thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
>
The'y're putting the nail in the coffin of the airline industry. My
husband flies with computer parts worth a hell of a hot more money than
the components alone - there is no way he will check them.
-L.
Gregory Morrow
Andy wrote:
> Where will it end before the skies are simply empty due to travel
> restrictions?
>
> It seems the terrorists have accomplished one objective, keeping us
> grounded and afraid to travel. A "Do not disturb" tactic!
>
> Where WILL it end?
Airline stocks are doing okay and if this is the only "event" it won't have
much if any effect on air travel (unlike 9/11)...airlines are at record -
high load factors (in the US highest since 1945), especially on trans -
atlantic routes. It's been hard to find tickets at any price on some
routes...
> America is taking rediculous measures!!! I doubt our friends across the
> pond have it this bad!
No, airline security "across the pond" is very thorough and MUCH better than
the ham - handed efforts we've had in the US. Remember the Brits have been
battling IRA terrorism, the Germans had domestic terrorism, the Spanish ETA,
the French and Russians too. The Italians had a massacre at Rome airport.
In 1970 the PLO hijacked a bunch of European airlines' planes and blew them
up in the desert...
My first trip abroad was to the UK in 1975. On the return TWA flight from
Heathrow the security guard very politely but *very* thoroughly inspected
everything and gave me a body pat - down. This was at the height of IRA
terrorism...Americans would blanch at what the Brits had to go through in
those days, e.g. no backpacks or bags in some public places, etc.
Back in the 70's you'd fly into some European airports and see armored troop
carriers "ready for action" on the apron -- and this included at Zurich.
Out here at O'Hare British Airways has been screening cabin and hold baggage
with advanced explosive - screening machines for many years, the US is just
catching up since 9/11.
On the nooze they interviewed.a woman who had just returned from touring
Israel. She said, "Why should I be upset by all this screening? People
should fly to Israel to get a *real* taste of what screening is..."
Europeans and others are used to all this...
> I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero carry-
> ons???
I'd rather be "inconvenienced" than dead...YMMV :-)
> The next step is a Customs check on domestic flights! Mark my words!!!
>
You on the bong when you post, Andy...???
> It's gonna bankrupt the airline industry.
The airline industry is pulling out of some of it's bankruptcy woes and some
airlines are even making profits again...
--
Best
Greg
Mordechai Housman
news:4k3nr2F...@individual.net...
I have no desire to go 12 hours without food AND endure a plane trip and
jet lag. Furthermore, many people simply CANNOT go 12 hours without
food, and yes, some of them can indeed die from that. I thank G-d I am
not one of them, and I pray I never become one, but such people do
exist.
-L.
I have thought about those for years. Better than that would be a
personal flying transportation device like they had on the Jetsons. :)
-L.
Andy
typed out:
>> http://www.moller.com/skycar/
>>
>> Andy
>
> I have thought about those for years. Better than that would be a
> personal flying transportation device like they had on the Jetsons. :)
>
> -L.
-L.,
The skycar is the closest thing to the Jetsons yet. Since takes off and
lands like a helicoptor and cruises like a jet, you could land it in your
driveway! The deal maker is that it comes with parachutes! Not like those
LARGE airlines that only give you a flotation device!!! The BUMS!!! ;)
Andy
Gregory Morrow
Vilco wrote:
You are one of the few Europeans that "sees the light" on this subject. I
constantly discuss this issue with Europeans on the rec.travel.europe and
despite all they simply don't seem to *get it* regarding the subjects of
Israel, Islamo - fascim, etc...
Your countryman Oriana Fallaci has written wisely and extensively (several
best - selling books, etc.) about the Islamist threat to Europe,
unfortunately her views don't appear to be gaining currency amongst the
mainstream...in fact the response to her was to be brought to trial for some
of her ideas!
--
Best
Greg
Mordechai Housman
news:jeidnQWnxOa6CUHZ...@comcast.com...
I dunno. It was fun the last two times I exploded over the Atlantic.
Mind you, we were all consenting adults. ;)
Julia Altshuler
the news, the first thing I thought of was hiding my skin lotion and
chapstick in a small plastic container under my shirt. I'm lucky enough
not to need a great deal in the way of personal products, but airplanes
dry me out so I like to have those with me, and I carry some
non-prescription medicines in a tiny pillbox that I keep in my pocket.
I've always taken a certain pride in not even needing to carry a purse
since handkerchief, comb, chapstick, and pillbox all go in my jeans
pockets (as do wallet, keys, coins, a small notebook and a pen). (Also
tampax and passport if needed.)
If hiding everything in a cloth bag under my shirt occurred to harmless
innocent me, why has it not occurred to the airline security industry
that terrorists could think of it too?
--Lia
kilikini
"-L." <gent...@peacemail.com> wrote in message
news:1155313666.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> kilikini wrote:
>
> The'y're putting the nail in the coffin of the airline industry. My
> husband flies with computer parts worth a hell of a hot more money than
> the components alone - there is no way he will check them.
>
> -L.
>
I'm thinking the same thing, Lyn.
kili
Curt Nelson
"Gregory Morrow" <gregorymorrowIMPLEMENTPLAN9!@earthlink.net> wrote in
message news:932Dg.7442$0e5....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> I only recently flew from Newark to Las Vegas, a 5 hour or so flight,
>> they surely did serve food.
>
>
> Was this Continental? AFAIK they are still the only airline in the US
> serving meals in Coach...I see them getting fairly decent reviews for
> their
> food on some of the travel sites.
Alaska Airlines still serves meals in Coach.
Hasta,
Curt Nelson
Dave Bugg
> The'y're putting the nail in the coffin of the airline industry.
I'm sure you're right, the terrorists *are* trying to put a nail in the
coffin of the airline industry; and any other segment of our way of life.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com
sf
Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> Oh pshaw, on Fri 11 Aug 2006 04:06:37a, kilikini meant to say...
>
> >
> > "kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> >
> > plane! That includes, lip gloss, soda, lip stick, foundation make up,
> > etc.
> >
> > I guess crackers are okay. Gee, that's swell.
>
>
> Flying used to be a pleasure. At best, now, it's an unpleasant means to
> an end. I have no desire to fly.
>
I'm glad we returned last weekend, not this weekend! My in-laws are
leaving for europe on Saturday. They have to comply with the new
regulations AND arrive at the airport 3 hours early because of the
horrendous lines this is causing.
Michel Boucher
$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com:
> I don't see how they can do this.
Paranoia knows no bounds.
--
"At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth
is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Michel Boucher
news:4k3nr2F...@individual.net:
Yes, but as you can't take carry on luggage, are you supposed to carry
that sandwich in your hand?
Also, you can't carry books.
Michel Boucher
news:196dndDWNIPcEEHZ...@comcast.com:
> Luckily, when my
> DD was a baby, she'd drink it straight from the tap, so no need to
> bring the milk in bottles with me.
Hey, I'm turning 60 in December and I still like the tap ;-)
Michel Boucher
> "Al Reid" <are...@reidDASHhome.com> wrote
>
>> It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
>> have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting
>> passenger carry-on.
>
> That's correct. The airline will have their own (I imagine)
> screened beverages, etc. And I've always been able to order
> a free soda or water.
Which of course could lead one to believe the entire incident is a
fabrication by airlines to ensure in-flight sales of their products.
This will make it diificult for people to fly and get work done at the
same time. Business travel will change.
Michel Boucher
>> Good heavens lip stick???? I have heard of "this is a stick-up"
>> but that's ridiculous...
>
> Surely you can see how plastic explosives could be made
> to mimic lipstick?
All this time I thought it was lipstick that was mimicking C4.
SD
Michel Boucher wrote:
> "Nancy Young" <qwe...@monmouth.com> wrote in
> news:ebhr6n$smt$1...@news.monmouth.com:
>
> > "Al Reid" <are...@reidDASHhome.com> wrote
> >
> >> It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
> >> have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting
> >> passenger carry-on.
> >
> > That's correct. The airline will have their own (I imagine)
> > screened beverages, etc. And I've always been able to order
> > a free soda or water.
>
> Which of course could lead one to believe the entire incident is a
> fabrication by airlines to ensure in-flight sales of their products.
>
Only one problem with that theory - soda, water, and juices are free
even in the cheap seats. In fact when I flew last week and this week
as well as in June, not only did we get the beverages free with our
meals, we got two to three EXTRA offferings of free beverages during
the flight. There was no sales revenue generated at all by beverages
other than alcohol sales in coach.
SD
SD
I had meals in coach on Delta in June.
SD
Michel Boucher
@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
> Only one problem with that theory - soda, water, and juices are free
> even in the cheap seats. In fact when I flew last week and this week
> as well as in June, not only did we get the beverages free with our
> meals, we got two to three EXTRA offferings of free beverages during
> the flight. There was no sales revenue generated at all by beverages
> other than alcohol sales in coach.
That was then!
Gregory Morrow
Michel Boucher wrote:
> "Nancy Young" <qwe...@monmouth.com> wrote in
> news:ebhr6n$smt$1...@news.monmouth.com:
>
> > "Al Reid" <are...@reidDASHhome.com> wrote
> >
> >> It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
> >> have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting
> >> passenger carry-on.
> >
> > That's correct. The airline will have their own (I imagine)
> > screened beverages, etc. And I've always been able to order
> > a free soda or water.
>
> Which of course could lead one to believe the entire incident is a
> fabrication by airlines to ensure in-flight sales of their products.
>
Duty free sales are taking a big hit apparently, about half or more of the
sales volume is booze and scent and these can no longer be carried aboard.
Interestingly, on - board sales of duty free "liquids" will apparently
continue...
--
Best
Greg
SD
Michel Boucher wrote:
> "SD" <west...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1155323856.534951.288350
> @m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Only one problem with that theory - soda, water, and juices are free
> > even in the cheap seats. In fact when I flew last week and this week
> > as well as in June, not only did we get the beverages free with our
> > meals, we got two to three EXTRA offferings of free beverages during
> > the flight. There was no sales revenue generated at all by beverages
> > other than alcohol sales in coach.
>
> That was then!
That was YESTERDAY also..when I flew back from Seattle Washington via
Houston Texas when all of this crap started.
SD
SD
They allowed duty free booze yesterday, when I flew back from Seattle.
It was purchased before the rules changed. It was delivered to the gate
by the store in the airport and the flight attendants called you by
name to the front of the plane to claim it, with your receipt in hand
after the door to the plane was closed.
Things are changing day to day so what was valid yesterday or today may
very well change in a moment.
SD
Ophelia
"Dave Bugg" <dave...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ms4Dg.40$uJ5...@newsfe02.lga...
> -L. wrote:
>
>> The'y're putting the nail in the coffin of the airline industry.
>
> I'm sure you're right, the terrorists *are* trying to put a nail in the
> coffin of the airline industry; and any other segment of our way of life.
... and Tony Blair and George Bush are to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blair P. Houghton
>I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
>bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
>food.
>
>Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
>serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
Stop flying.
The terrorists have won.
>Suppose you fly from New York to Los Angles, you have a short lay-over in
>Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
>annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending is?
>Up to 8 hours? With no food?
>
>I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
>need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
>thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
It's probably permanent. The people in power right now
are utterly paranoid at having their total failure to
institute any sort of real anti-terror effort discovered.
So they're instituting anti-freedom efforts which have
the side effect of choking off any attempt at terrorism by
preventing certain molecules from entering crowded places
that fly through the air.
They've done nothing to reduce the social forces that lead
to the creation of a homicidal terrorist, though, so once
the bomb-happy rejects realize that airplanes are out,
they'll just start bombing malls.
The solution is regime change. Create diplomacy with those
nations that appear to have terror as a product, and turn
their governments and police forces to the job of finding
and ending the terrorist-mindset production systems.
Oh, and we need to stop starting wars for lies. That's
guaranteed recruiting material for the asymmetric enemy.
--Blair
Felice Friese
Ah, well that makes all the difference, doesn't it! :-)
Felice
Andy
11 Aug 2006, typed out:
> kilikini <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
Have you ever seen the movie "12 Monkeys"???
Dave Bugg
> ... and Tony Blair and George Bush are to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Uh huh. Sure. Anything you say.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com
Blair P. Houghton
>Where will it end before the skies are simply empty due to travel
>restrictions?
9/11/2001 through 9/14/2001, iirc...
>It seems the terrorists have accomplished one objective, keeping us
>grounded and afraid to travel. A "Do not disturb" tactic!
The terrorists didn't accomplish anything. They were
caught three days before they were going to board.
The politicians accomplished this mess.
>Where WILL it end?
When we sack-up and realize we've been living in this
world all along.
>America is taking rediculous measures!!! I doubt our friends across the
>pond have it this bad!
Britain instituted the "no carryon" rule immediately.
We only made people toss their wet items.
>I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero carry-
>ons???
Next step is sedating passengers to the point of
incapacitation. Which would be a good thing for
most of them.
>The next step is a Customs check on domestic flights! Mark my words!!!
Customs checks were never this idiotic.
>It's gonna bankrupt the airline industry.
That's very likely. But it's about time.
>Don't get me started!
Don't overestimate your importance.
Blair P. Houghton
>> I really don't want to be inconvenienced to such an extreme! Zero carry-
>> ons???
>
>believe in their ways you need to think differently.
You need to realize they're just like the other "peace
loving people" who have been doing the same for 2,000
years.
--Blair
kilikini
"Blair P. Houghton" <b@p.h> wrote in message
news:cY6Dg.440945$C62.4...@fe12.news.easynews.com...
> kilikini <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
> It's probably permanent. The people in power right now
> are utterly paranoid at having their total failure to
> institute any sort of real anti-terror effort discovered.
>
> So they're instituting anti-freedom efforts which have
> the side effect of choking off any attempt at terrorism by
> preventing certain molecules from entering crowded places
> that fly through the air.
>
> They've done nothing to reduce the social forces that lead
> to the creation of a homicidal terrorist, though, so once
> the bomb-happy rejects realize that airplanes are out,
> they'll just start bombing malls.
>
> The solution is regime change. Create diplomacy with those
> nations that appear to have terror as a product, and turn
> their governments and police forces to the job of finding
> and ending the terrorist-mindset production systems.
>
> Oh, and we need to stop starting wars for lies. That's
> guaranteed recruiting material for the asymmetric enemy.
>
I agree with you 100% (or should that be 100$, government wise?).
Revolution number 10?
kili
Blair P. Houghton
>Airline stocks are doing okay and if this is the only "event" it won't have
>much if any effect on air travel (unlike 9/11)...airlines are at record -
>high load factors (in the US highest since 1945), especially on trans -
>atlantic routes. It's been hard to find tickets at any price on some
>routes...
They're not doing good:
http://i8.tinypic.com/24deiwx.png
Their profit margins are razor-thin to negative with the
current price of fuel. Ridership was already dropping, not
rising, causing carriers to start fall fare sales early.
Handling all that extra baggage is going to cost them
money or force them to raise prices. They're going to
lose cargo space that they were making money on selling
it to shippers. Business travellers, who pay top-dollar
for seats, are moving to micro-carriers in droves.
It won't take much of a reduction in travel for
them to start merging and dying and begging for
multi-billion-dollar buyouts.
And you know this won't be the only "event". The idiots
running this country are still acting in ways that give
the suicidal nutcases a reason to go over the edge.
>The airline industry is pulling out of some of it's bankruptcy woes and some
>airlines are even making profits again...
Check data above.
They're headed right back into the shitter.
--Blair
Blair P. Houghton
>If hiding everything in a cloth bag under my shirt occurred to harmless
>innocent me, why has it not occurred to the airline security industry
>that terrorists could think of it too?
Ma'am? We're going to have to ask you to step behind
this divider so we can search you.
What's this?
What's in this bag?
Why were you hiding this?
Do you know that it's against federal law to try to
circumvent security measures?
No, ma'am. I can't hurry this up. Have a seat. You'll be
missing your flight.
--Blair
Pete C.
>
> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
> food.
>
> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
> Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
> annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending is?
> Up to 8 hours? With no food?
>
> I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
> need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
> thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
>
I would expect they will get a clue in short order and ok food /
beverages purchased from vendors within the secure gate area.
Pete C.
Julia Altshuler
> Ma'am? We're going to have to ask you to step behind
> this divider so we can search you.
>
> What's this?
>
> What's in this bag?
>
> Why were you hiding this?
>
> Do you know that it's against federal law to try to
> circumvent security measures?
>
> No, ma'am. I can't hurry this up. Have a seat. You'll be
> missing your flight.
My imagination was going more in this direction.
The last time I flew, the lines at security were long, and people were
impatient, but everyone knew the score and was cooperating as best they
could. I watched with my usual detachment as each person went to the
appropriate line, stooped to remove shoes, took off belts, emptied
pockets, raised arms to be wanded, stepped into a blower/sniffer
machine, etc., then put shoes and belts back on, combed hair and
rearranged clothes. This was all done with a minimum of fuss and noise
and all with a quiet, matter-of-fact, mind-your-own business, air though
it was in public.
I don't consider myself prudish, but I have ordinary modesty for a
middle aged woman. I don't normally undress in public (the beach is
different), and I look away when someone else does. I try to have my
hair and clothing arranged before I go out, and if I need an adjustment,
I try, within reason, to duck into the ladies room to do it, and yet
there I was, in a great crowd of people, tucking in my shirt, putting my
things away, and basically getting dressed in front of a great crowd of
people-- who were all doing the same thing.
The new regulations about no liquids or personal items on board made me
imagine the same scene, the same idea of private activity done in
public, only now people would be stripping down to their privies,
lifting their shirts, lowering their trousers, loosening their bras,
opening their zippers, removing their girdles, walking through security,
being felt up, and then dressing again, all with the same pre-occupied,
shoulder shrugging, lack of concern as before.
Jim suggested that the whole thing was a plot on the part of the
cosmetics industry to make people buy more sunscreen, lipstick and hand
lotion, as they wouldn't put it in their checked luggage for fear of
spillage, would just buy more at their destination, and then leave it in
the hotel when they got there.
--Lia
~-x-y-~
> lifting their shirts, lowering their trousers, loosening their bras,
> opening their zippers, removing their girdles,
People still wear girdles...???
Julia Altshuler
> People still wear girdles?
Obviously, not on airplanes.
--Lia
Nexis
"kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1xZCg.12723$hu3....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
>> bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
>> food.
>>
>> Okay, if you can't bring a soda or food on the plane and the planes quit
>> serving food, what in the world are you supposed to do on a long flight?
>> Suppose you fly from New York to Los Angles, you have a short lay-over in
>> Dallas (not enough time to buy food at the airport, just long enough to be
>> annoying), what do you think the amount of time you're actually spending
> is?
>> Up to 8 hours? With no food?
>>
>> I don't see how they can do this. Some people have medical conditions and
>> need food at certain intervals during the day. I hope this is a temporary
>> thing due to the Heathrow scare and not a permanent situation.
>>
>
> plane! That includes, lip gloss, soda, lip stick, foundation make up, etc.
>
> I guess crackers are okay. Gee, that's swell.
>
> kili
kili,
For the most part, you can still have them in your checked luggage, just not in
carry-on.
kimberly
>
>
Nexis
"Michel Boucher" <alsa...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:Xns981C9A650132...@216.196.97.131...
> "Nancy Young" <qwe...@monmouth.com> wrote in
> news:ebhr6n$smt$1...@news.monmouth.com:
>
>> "Al Reid" <are...@reidDASHhome.com> wrote
>>
>>> It's not clear, however, that the airline will not
>>> have beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting
>>> passenger carry-on.
>>
>> That's correct. The airline will have their own (I imagine)
>> screened beverages, etc. And I've always been able to order
>> a free soda or water.
>
> Which of course could lead one to believe the entire incident is a
> fabrication by airlines to ensure in-flight sales of their products.
>
> This will make it diificult for people to fly and get work done at the
> same time. Business travel will change.
>
> --
Well except for the fact that they're not selling beverages (except for alcohol,
which you've always had to pay for). Soda, water, coffee, and juice are free, and
have been on every flight I've ever been on.
And not all airlines are disallowing carry-ons, so business travel won't change that
much either.
The people who will suffer the most from this are the Duty Free stores...since nearly
every thing they sell is liquid.
Proctor & Gamble, and other companies like them, are in for a gold rush though.
kimberly
Nexis
"Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns981C34BBD92D0wa...@217.22.228.19...
> Oh pshaw, on Fri 11 Aug 2006 04:42:49a, Al Reid meant to say...
>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns981C2E70B41D3wa...@217.22.228.19...
>>> Oh pshaw, on Fri 11 Aug 2006 04:06:37a, kilikini meant to say...
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, as we choke to death on the cracker dust for lack of liquid.
>>>
>>> Flying used to be a pleasure. At best, now, it's an unpleasant means
>>> to an end. I have no desire to fly.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Wayne Boatwright
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Has all we've learned been wrong?
>>>
>>
>> I'm going to be flying in the near future. I used to fly all of the
>> time (before 9/11). your statement "At best, now, it's an unpleasant
>> means to an end." reminds me of the lyrics to Harry Chapin's song
>> Greyhound: "Its got to be the going, not the getting there, that's
>> good."
>
> Ah, yes, I remember that one. I Like Harry Chapin.
>
>> My flight is just a little over 2 hrs and I think I can get by without a
>> drink. It's not clear, however, that the airline will not have
>> beverages on-board. I thought it was just restricting passenger
>> carry-on.
>
> pleasure. IMHO, the whole business of flying has become an unpleasant and
> unsettling experience. It used to be fun and exciting.
>
> The airines will have beverages. The restriction is *anything* carried by
> passengers. Wonder what they do aboutr vials of insulin and syringes?
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright
According to the Wall St Journal, the exceptions are baby formula and medications, so
that would mean insulin is fine I guess.
My parents are flying to MN with me in 10 days, and my father will be brining
insulin.
kimberly
Nexis
"SD" <west...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1155307965.9...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>> In article <ZfZCg.11358$Pc....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>> "kilikini" <kiliki...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm watching CNN and listening to the new airline restrictions. You can't
>> > bring a carry-on on the plane anymore. Period. No purse, no computer, no
>> > food.
>>
>> Wrong. No liquids, gel substances, maybe others. Computers and other
>> electronics are ok. Handbag ok. Dunno about food in general.
>
> I flew yesterday. Yesterday electronics were ok. I was told by the
> flight attendants it was a good thing my ticket was for Thursday and
> not Friday beacuse they had been told as of today, only a small
> transparent bag with your tickets, medications, id, etc would be
> allowed in the cabin. Everything else would have to go into checked
> baggage. I flew the 1240 am flight from Seattle to San Pedro Sula
> yesterday - 8 hours of this nonsense. Food was served wih beverages and
> then there was a separate beverage service after the meal was finished.
>
> SD
>
It depends on the airline, and whether it's domestic or international. Personally, I
think checking my luggage and not having a carry-on is a far preferable scenario to
blowing up.
sd
"jacqui{JB}" <shining_o...@ME.hotmail.com> wrote:
> But please, people, don't spread rumors: get your information from the TSA
> or the airport or airline you plan to travel with -- they should have the
> latest and greatest (?) information.
Is this the same TSA that does not seem to know or understand that
removing shoes is _not_ required and that we can request hand
inspection of camera film without triggering a regular Spanish
Inquisition? I think you give these people _far_ too much credit.
We will continue to overreact to past threats and make law-abiding
individuals' flights miserable while we completely ignore the dozens
of other ways undetectable ways that terrorists can achieve violent
goals. It's far easier to make a big show of this now-non-threat and
to make victims of the innocent than it is to actually fight terror
-- especially with an Administration continually distracted by shiny
objects.
Ob food: I like to put a small cooler in the car when I go on
vacation. It's much easier than trying to eat or drink anything on
an airplane anymore.
sd
The Bubbo
> In article <44dc7f75$0$146$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
> "jacqui{JB}" <shining_o...@ME.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> But please, people, don't spread rumors: get your information from the TSA
>> or the airport or airline you plan to travel with -- they should have the
>> latest and greatest (?) information.
>
> Is this the same TSA that does not seem to know or understand that
> removing shoes is _not_ required and that we can request hand
> inspection of camera film without triggering a regular Spanish
> Inquisition? I think you give these people _far_ too much credit.
>
>
I dated a TSA guy very briefly once. I never really had faith in them before
that, I really didn't after I met him. We're not talking highly trained
professionals here...
--
.:Heather:.
www.velvet-c.com
I thought I was driving by Gettysburg once but it ends up I was just driving
by your mom's house.
-L.
sd wrote:
> In article <44dc7f75$0$146$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
> "jacqui{JB}" <shining_o...@ME.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But please, people, don't spread rumors: get your information from the TSA
> > or the airport or airline you plan to travel with -- they should have the
> > latest and greatest (?) information.
>
> Is this the same TSA that does not seem to know or understand that
> removing shoes is _not_ required and that we can request hand
> inspection of camera film without triggering a regular Spanish
> Inquisition? I think you give these people _far_ too much credit.
My husband is of mixed heritage, has medium brown skin, has his head
shaved and is fairly tall/muscular (6'1", 220lbs). *Every* time he
flies he is singled out and pulled off for further search. Every
single time. Doesn't matter if he is flying for business or flying with
us as a family. Yet they *claim* they don't racially profile.
-L.
jmcquown
> "ms_peacock" <ms_pe...@wbsnet.org> wrote in
> news:4k3nr2F...@individual.net:>> news:Jm0Dg.3$df.2@trndny06...
>>> If they extend it to all food, that will be a major problem for
>>> many Jews. Many of us won't eat airline food, even what THEY
>>> claim is kosher. So we MUST bring our own food. On a 12-hour
>>> trip, like to Israel, for example, bringing no food would
>>> constitute a major problem.
>>>
>>> Mordechai
>>
>> You won't die in 12 hours without food. Really. The restrictions
>> are for liquids anyway, not food.
>
> Yes, but as you can't take carry on luggage, are you supposed to carry
> that sandwich in your hand?
>
> Also, you can't carry books.
I thought the books were restricted only on international flights? I'd
already planned to call the airline but this is a kicker for me. I have a
lengthy layover in Atlanta and I refuse to sit there without a book!
Jill
Wayne Boatwright
Buy a short book at the Atlanta airport taht you can read during the
layover.
--
Wayne Boatwright
__________________________________________________
Which way to Castle Anthrax?
jmcquown
> Michel Boucher <alsa...@rogers.com>
> news:Xns981C9A650132...@216.196.97.131:
>
>>
>> Which of course could lead one to believe the entire incident is a
>> fabrication by airlines to ensure in-flight sales of their products.
>>
>> This will make it diificult for people to fly and get work done at
>> the same time. Business travel will change.
>
> For pleasure travel it will certainly change my plans. I'm looking
> into pleasure train travel just for the fun of it. I want to go to
> NYC this fall and I'm now not even sure how I'm going to get there.
> Hell, I might just drive it.
>
> Michael
Yeah, I'm not looking forward to having to drive to the airport at 5AM
because of the "get there three hours in advance" rule. I can put personal
care items in a bag in my checked luggage, no biggy. But this is going to
extend my flight to Minneapolis (including a layover in Atlanta) to 8.5
hours. Hell, I could practically drive there in that amount of time. But
as others have said, it's better than blowing up in mid-air.
Jill
jacqui{JB}
news:sd55117-61F96E...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <44dc7f75$0$146$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
> "jacqui{JB}" <shining_o...@ME.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But please, people, don't spread rumors: get
> > your information from the TSA or the airport
> > or airline you plan to travel with -- they should
> > have the latest and greatest (?) information.
> Is this the same TSA that does not seem to know
> or understand that removing shoes is _not_ required
> and that we can request hand inspection of camera
> film without triggering a regular Spanish Inquisition?
> I think you give these people _far_ too much credit.
You're right about the TSA, of course. Why I keep trying to give those
folks the benefit of the doubt is beyond me. Consider it a brief slip of
rationality. :)
We had an interesting time flying out of DC last summer. Got to the airport
in plenty of time, got in line for security, had our tickets checked and
stamped by some security person at the end of the line and figured that was
it for the tickets wrt security, so stashed them away in our hand-luggage.
Got to the x-ray machines, took off our shoes, put everything on the
conveyor and then were stopped short by some officious little woman who
wouldn't let us through the screening machine without seeing our tickets.
Well, the tickets have just gone through the x-ray machine, so if you'll
just hand back the bag or let one of us walk through to get the tickets,
we'll be happy to comply. No, nothing doing. Well, what, exactly, are we
supposed to do, since you won't let us through to get our bags, you won't
hand one of the bags back over, that nice young man over there who's already
through is offering to hand our bags back over to us, but you won't let that
happen, what, precisely, are we supposed to do here?
It took the TSA guy on my side of the line going over and taking my bag
back, so I could get my ticket, then go through, then get my husband's
ticket and give it to said immovable woman (who was by that time not even
acknowledging my husband, who had been nice and polite throughout), that we
got through. I noticed, as I was going through the screening machine that
there was a *small* sign, situated *behind* a timeclock (why is there a
punch-in/punch-out type of timeclock on the x-ray machine) saying to please
have your tickets ready. Most people hadn't put theirs away -- I'd hazard a
guess through luck more than anything else. I think that if you travel a
lot (like the husband and, to a lesser degree, I do), you tend to put things
away as soon as you don't need them anymore, simply to free up your hands.
It was really insane. And that woman would've been happy to let us stand
there all day, with our bags already screened and sitting at the end of the
x-ray machines (just waiting for someone to come along and take them, which
does happen from time to time). We were pleased to see her pulled away and
talked to by someone clearly in a higher position as we were leaving.
And don't get me started on the ridiculousness of not being able to lock
your bags when flying in the US. I don't see why they don't just screen and
search all of the bags before check-in (as they do in Japan), and have done
with it. That way, I can be with my suitcase while you rifle through it and
make sure everything gets put back in its place, rather than all
higgledy-piggledy (it's damn annoying to pick up a bag after a flight and
find things hanging out).
Well, this rant could go on all day, apparently ...
-j
kilikini
"~-x-y-~" <ByRequ...@cyber-rights.net> wrote in message
news:9CaDg.370303$Mn5.75960@pd7tw3no...
Someone, please tell William Shatner! LOL.
kili
kilikini
"-L." <gent...@peacemail.com> wrote in message
news:1155362206.9...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Lyn, you *know* they racially profile! They also tag people who fly solo.
kili
Michel Boucher
news:1155327569....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> Michel Boucher wrote:
>> "SD" <west...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1155323856.534951.288350
>> @m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Only one problem with that theory - soda, water, and juices are
>> > free even in the cheap seats. In fact when I flew last week
>> > and this week as well as in June, not only did we get the
>> > beverages free with our meals, we got two to three EXTRA
>> > offferings of free beverages during the flight. There was no
>> > sales revenue generated at all by beverages other than alcohol
>> > sales in coach.
>>
>> That was then!
>
> That was YESTERDAY also..when I flew back from Seattle Washington
> via Houston Texas when all of this crap started.
Give them time. It would appear callous to profit from human misery,
but as it's a natural reaction of capitalists, there will come a time
when they will see fit to engage in commercial transactions over items
which were free before.
The most ingenuous statement was that made by the Minister of Kultcher
in Alberta when the Alberta Provincial Museum started charging
admission. He said that it was his belie that the people (who
previously used the museum at no charge) would welcome the opportunity
to pay. Yeah, right...
--
"At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth
is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Michel Boucher
news:Xns981CA84806F3Ezj...@69.28.186.121:
> I want to go to NYC this
> fall and I'm now not even sure how I'm going to get there.
I would suggest the train, but they'll probably insist, not to be left
out, that you not bring on hand luggage.
Michel Boucher
>> I thought the books were restricted only on international
>> flights? I'd already planned to call the airline but this is a
>> kicker for me. I have a lengthy layover in Atlanta and I refuse
>> to sit there without a book!
>
> Buy a short book at the Atlanta airport taht you can read during
> the layover.
A Harlequin romance novel.
jmcquown
> "Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan" <shop...@foodsource.eat> wrote in
> news:Xns981CA84806F3Ezj...@69.28.186.121:
>
>> I want to go to NYC this
>> fall and I'm now not even sure how I'm going to get there.
>
> I would suggest the train, but they'll probably insist, not to be left
> out, that you not bring on hand luggage.
Plus trains don't go *everywhere* :)
jmcquown
> Wayne Boatwright <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns981CF14718352wa...@217.22.228.19:
>
>>> I thought the books were restricted only on international
>>> flights? I'd already planned to call the airline but this is a
>>> kicker for me. I have a lengthy layover in Atlanta and I refuse
>>> to sit there without a book!
>>
>> Buy a short book at the Atlanta airport taht you can read during
>> the layover.
>
> A Harlequin romance novel.
My choice runs more towards murder :) I read pretty fast. But they
definitely price-gouge if you buy a book at one of the airport kiosks. In
fact, many of them I've noticed only sell *hardback* books!
SD
I've been dealing with "get to the airport 3-4 hours before the flight
to the US" for four years now. Here all ALL checked baggage as well as
all carry-ons are hand searched. Add to that time the 2.5 hour drive
just to get to the airport. I have to leave the house 5.5 to 6.5 hours
before my flight departs. No big deal.
When I flew in and out of El Salvador, you needed an airline ticket to
enter the terminal. No ticket to fly, no entry to the terminal unless
you were escorting a minor child or an elderly person. Not only that,
your checked baggage was hand searched, your carry on bags were hand
searched, and then the dope and bomb dogs were brought through to sniff
the carry on baggage while you were sitting at the gate waiting to
board. Again, no big deal.
SD
SD
I paid the same price for two paperbacks at Hudson News in Atlanta and
at Borders in Houston that I would have paid iat a Barnes & Noble or
Borders in town. There was no price gouging, they charged the marked
cover price. This was very recent - like June 21st and again on August
2nd.
SD
Nancy Young
"SD" <west...@yahoo.com> wrote
> When I flew in and out of El Salvador, you needed an airline ticket to
> enter the terminal. No ticket to fly, no entry to the terminal unless
> you were escorting a minor child or an elderly person.
Interesting, that's how it is here now, too. I no longer have to worry
about it, but I used to see my inlaws off at the airport. No way no how
could I just leave them off at security and hope they find their gate.
Things changed after they could no longer fly at all. I wondered how
that situation worked under the new restrictions.
nancy
Gregory Morrow
jmcquown wrote:
From St. Louis Michael would first have to go to Chicago and thence a train
to DC. This would entail the better part of two days of travelling...
I like the train for a few hours (have taken it to St. Louis from Chicago
many times). Overnight would be a different matter, I wouldn't want to sit
in a chair coach overnight. The seats themselves are quite comfortable but
you've got too many variables such as crying/unruly kids, yakkers, etc. for
that long of a trip (from Chicago to DC is about 24 hours IIRC). Sleeping
accomodations are available but then you are more likely than not getting
into some serious bucks...
It would be fun to get a deluxe room (or whatever the most expensive
sleeping accomodation is called) and travel with a friend or two...
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
Gregory Morrow wrote:
> From St. Louis Michael would first have to go to Chicago and thence a
train
> to DC.
Should be "train to NYC"...
--
Best
Greg
SD
I flew Continental on a domestic leg and then international at 1230 am
Thursday 10 August. The flight attendant on Continental told us that
the policy for Continental starting on Friday would be one small Ziploc
carryon with medications, id, cash, airline ticket, passport, etc.
I won't put $2000 worth of laptop and $4000 worth of camera equipment
in checked baggage and then have TSA tell me I have to leave lugggage
UNLOCKED so they can inspect it if they feel the need to inspect. I've
already had too much crap ripped off out of checked luggage where they
actually broke locks off and stole the stuff. When airlines can get
100% of their passengers and baggage arriving at the destination with
NO damage, loss, or theft, then I'll check those things. Until then,
I'll find alternate means of traveling.
SD
Michel Boucher
news:LmkDg.1260$q96...@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
They don't go to NYC? I went to NYC on the train back in 1966 to take
the boat to Spain.
And besides, it may make train travel more attractive if you're not as
hampered as you are by flying. Not everyone needs to be in a hurry to
get there.
Michel Boucher
@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
> But they
> definitely price-gouge
Sorry, but I MUST point out that "to price-gouge" is not a verb.
Neither are "to Christmas shop", "to grocery shop" or any other similar
construct. Otherwise, I agree :-)
Michel Boucher
news:1155390304.7...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> I've been dealing with "get to the airport 3-4 hours before the
> flight to the US" for four years now. Here all ALL checked
> baggage as well as all carry-ons are hand searched. Add to that
> time the 2.5 hour drive just to get to the airport. I have to
> leave the house 5.5 to 6.5 hours before my flight departs. No big
> deal.
Who *are* these paranoid people? :-)