Maybe TSA’s liquid rules don’t make us safer — just angrier

Many passengers are now bringing empty water bottles through TSA security, to be filled later with tap water at the airport.

That’s because of new charges being assessed by the airlines for in-flight beverages, including bottled water. Our own Chris Elliott has discussed this strategy.

Seeing passengers bringing empty containers through airport security has renewed my questions about the utility and effectiveness of TSA’s liquids’ restrictions in preventing in-flight terrorism.

I remember 9/11 as if it was yesterday. I remember its horror, and my fear of friends crushed in the burning wreckage of the Twin Towers. I remember the emotional phone calls, and the anxiety of waiting to hear who had lived, and who had died.

Homeland Security, and Transportation Security Administration, were born of that horror. While every American wants DHS and TSA to be successful protecting our country from terrorists, that doesn’t stop many of us from wondering whether their regulations and practices make sense.

In the months and years since 9/11, we’ve learned the terrorists who carried out the attacks had a detailed plan, which took a great deal of collaboration among many individuals world-wide, communication, training, cash, and commitment.

In August, 2006, United Kingdom police discovered and foiled an alleged transatlantic airplane terrorist plot to detonate liquid explosives carried onboard several airplanes traveling from the UK to the US and Canada. Almost immediately thereafter, all liquids and gels were banned from carry-on luggage.

On September 25, 2006, TSA Administrator Kip Hawley told us, “Since the initial total (liquid and gel) ban, experts from around the government, including the FBI and our national labs have analyzed the information we now know, and have conducted extensive explosives testing to get a better understanding of the threat.”

He added:
While this novel type of liquid explosives is now an ongoing part of the terrorist playbook and must be dealt with, we now know enough to say that a total (liquid and gel) ban is no longer needed from a security point of view.

Deputy Secretary Of Homeland Security Michael Jackson said, “What you see here today is a prudent balancing of the work that we need to do to protect security, and common sense here being in balance. I would say that we should underscore this point. It is safe to fly. These measures make it safe to fly.”

Jackson was speaking about TSA’s then new 3-1-1 requirements. But do these measures make it safe to fly, as Deputy Secretary Jackson says?

The point of 3-1-1 is to prevent a terrorist from carrying enough liquid explosive on a plane which could either destroy it in the air, or cause it to crash. I think it would be irresponsible to plan security measures which assume that terrorists will act alone, and not in groups with a coordinated plan. I submit TSA’s 3-1-1 regulations do just that.

In Tripso’s Talking Travelers forums, we have discussed that TSA rules and regulations have so many exceptions to the 3-1-1 rules, that the exceptions to the rules have rendered them worthless. I determined that in using the baggie and the exceptions, I can bring at least 51 ounces of liquids and gels in my carry-on.

I submit, as a graduate chemical engineer, that with 51 ounces of the right liquids, a terrorist, even working alone, could blow one big hole in the side of a plane which might bring it down.

Anyone can fit as much as 15 ounces of liquids and gels in their baggie. Eight terrorists working together could therefore bring almost a gallon of liquid explosives aboard a plane. If just four of them bring an empty quart bottle of water through security, the eight terrorists could assemble four quart sized bombs. Once on board, that’s enough to blow a very large hole in any plane.

In my opinion, these examples clearly show the great inconvenience that TSA’s liquid rules impose on us do little, if anything, to make flying safe.

Air travel today is tough enough without having to obey useless regulations.