The AP? They put a new article up.I am surprised the editor has not changed the title of the article yet which is really misleading.
The AP? They put a new article up.I am surprised the editor has not changed the title of the article yet which is really misleading.
Oh puuhlease give it up with the anti-Trump rhetoric. Would you have made this comment if DHS under the Obama administration had introduced such measures?Smells like more BS from the camp of Dear Leader Trump...
But hey, who knows, maybe DHS isn't lying and there is "new intelligence" that makes this legitimately necessary.
Aren't you glad and reassured this administration is taking action on new intelligence, to keep us safe?
Oh puuhlease give it up with the anti-Trump rhetoric. Would you have made this comment if DHS under the Obama administration had introduced such measures?
Aren't you glad and reassured this administration is taking action on new intelligence, to keep us safe?
With all due respect, speak for yourself. The corruption, lies, deceit, and incompetence that have gone on under previous administrations is mindboggling. I find it refreshing to hear the truth for a change.It's only good intelligence when it benefits Trumps narrative, otherwise it's fake news. The last thing anyone thinks of when it comes to this administration is reassurance.....
We have no way of knowing whether this measure is, as you put it 'stupid sh*t'. Time will tell if this was warranted.No, I wouldn't have, because DHS typically didn't do stupid sh*t at the direction of President Obama.
Really very odd. Family of 5 with huge smartphones will be fine - one person with a Kindle is a no-no. That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Maybe there genuinely good intelligence that would explain it if they could say, I guess?! But it's hard to imagine how this really achieves anything that bad guys couldn't work around quite easily. Well I hope it stops anything bad it's aimed at stopping anyway, however inexplicable it seems.
Isn't luggage going in the cargo hold subjected to bomb-sniffing dogs?As a Marine, please explain how having these bomb-packed devices in the cargo hold makes anyone safer.
They aren't bombs literally. Lithium ion batteries though can be very combustible. Thus the idea of gathering up all the batteries and the devices with them, and placing them in one enclosed space on an aircraft is an awesomeIsn't luggage going in the cargo hold subjected to bomb-sniffing dogs?
Yes. In hold, inside luggage, surrounded by other luggage or in luggage container. In the cabin the laptop could be held against skin of aircraft or window and exploded. Explosion inside luggage in hold would be less likely in all probability to pierce aircraft skin.So consumer electronics packed with explosives are safer in the cargo hold? Huh?
The AP? They put a new article up.
Ahh... Yes, you're correct.The title makes it seem that you cannot carry these electronics at all whereas it's about not being able to carry them in the carry on luggage.
Smells like more BS from the camp of Dear Leader Trump...
But hey, who knows, maybe DHS isn't lying and there is "new intelligence" that makes this legitimately necessary.
Are you flying direct from those particular countries, on those particular air carriers. You do realize this is very specific to non stop flights from limited locations to US and probably Great Britain.So does this mean I can now check all of my camera batteries rather than being required to bring them onboard in my backpack?
Are you flying direct from those particular countries, on those particular air carriers. You do realize this is very specific to non stop flights from limited locations to US and probably Great Britain.
Well, at least they got Saudi Arabia this time around.
As a Marine, please explain how having these bomb-packed devices in the cargo hold makes anyone safer.