What is the NLP? How does membership of this group qualify a member to comment on national security?

I very much agree with the article. Terrorism using planes in the past 30 years is somthing we have all been aware of. It would have been more difficult to get box cutters past airport security prior to 9/11 in Australia as our hand luggage was always checked at major airports. Though in the USA, many airports were very relaxed with checking people. The ridiculous items being removed from passengers such as the ones mentioned and other itmes such as tweezers, sewing kits, nail clippers have taken the fear one step too far. This will not prevent an attack. There are many things to use on planes if one wanted to cause harm. Knife and fork anyone? Searching backpacks/bags at railways stations will not prevent an attack. Bombs can be made so small and minute that they could be hidden anywhere. Will they do body searches? Handbag Searches? Look under hats? Shoes? The attackers in London were carrying back packs and travelled during a busy rush hour. We cannot stop living, we cannot be marshalled into fenced areas on our way to work. We are giving in to the fear.
It is interesting to note, that the world changed after the great USA was attacked, yet when I was living in Houston Texas USA, (post 9/11), a friend of mine travelled back to Australia and nothing was checked! Not her main luggage, not her hand luggage. Although when I was leaving via LA last year, I was frisked and searched before being allowed into the Qantas area.

There are just too many ways for terrorists to attack.We could send our economy broke plugging every avenue of attack.It is the ordinary citizen that must be alert to strange behaviour.

The Brits copped a hiding from the German bombing in WW2,and they went to work reguardless.Our "Nanny State" has made us a tad whimpish.

Terrorism is to the governments of Britain, Australia and GB what the Reichstag fire was to Germany-an excuse to usher in police state laws whilst diverting the publics attention from their own malodourous machinations onto a shadowy "other" type enemy.

Opps, Telstra truth hitting headlines?-better bring in some new anti-terrorst laws-and let fear rule their lives!

Jellyback,you draw too long a bow with no arrows in your quiver to back your assertians.Really,equating the UK and Aust Govts with the Third Reich is leftest juvenile posturing.

The left is more worried about their power bases being eroded rather than dealing with tensions in our country they have helped create.ie Their open door policy to immigration during the 80's and 90's with no consideration of ,compatability,education,productivity or assimilation.

All immigrants should have intensive English classes and knowledge of a Nation that provides the prosperty they yearn.There should be a 5yr probation period before achieving citizenship.Access to social security during this period should also be limited.When we have all people committed to Aust ,we will have no terrorists to worrry about.

It is no accident that Aust is so prosperous.It took a lot of sacrifice and hard work of past generations that you and many others take for granted.

ARJAY

I'd go a lot further. I'd make serious adjustments to our history/social studies courses which specifically included close examination of pivotal points in history by which we have our current freedom.
I've mentioned them before in other threads but I'll add again here
Battle of Yarmuk was the beginning of the end of the Roman Empire militarily, (and the advance of militant Islam) then invasion of Spain, and the Battle of Tours in 732 where that same militant Islam was stopped. Then the Seige of Vienna in as recent at 1683 where 200,000 Muslims were routed as they tried to take over the rest of Europe. I'd name special days which commemorate the key people in thie stream of history for all our kids to contemplate.

I'd make sure also, that such things were raised with would be immigrants and that they understood our national view on the events, and were able to truly share our national view on such things. (might weed out some ratbags)

On security ? sheesh.. we are so vulnerable its not funny.
There is a reserviour close to melbourne, where a slight detour from the walking track could take you to the above dam wall area and.. u can fill in the blanks.

A much broader approach is needed and has to begin with all the things you metioned, along with an increasing sense of national identity and shared culture.

I've been watching a DVD this morning on North Korea, the degree of mind control and unrelenting socialisation is incredble. You have only ONE TV chanel which broadcasts all "Our great leader" stuff 5 hours a day, and a radio receiver in every kitchen which can only be turned 'down' but not 'off' which does similar stuff.

The kids have Revolutionary Politics lessons where they are asked "Now children, how many excellences does our great leader have ?" The mass games they do though is something out of this world.. truly great. But in a sicko TRUMAN kind of way.

In my article I asserted that sticky tape is not yet prohibited. I have subsequently realised that I was wrong, because it clearly falls into the category of "Things capable of being used to restrain a person and not otherwise permitted under the Act or these Regulations."

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_reg/atsr2005n18o2005540/s1.07.html

I chose not to try to ridicule the regulations, although it can be quite difficult to avoid. With a bit of imagination, one can find a reason for almost anything being a prohibited item under the regulations.

However, there are few things that are definitely not prohibited, because the regulation says so:

Up to two litres of alcohol (even pure ethanol, presumably).

Up to two litres of ligher fuel.

Up to two kilograms of matches.

Up to two kilograms of an aerosol hairspray even if the propellant is imflamable.

Any number of safety razors, apparently even if they contain razorblades.

Any number of walking sticks or crutches, whether or not you need them.

A metal fork (provided it has round or square tines, and a non-detachable handle that is rounded), even though repeated bending will break the shaft and leave a dangerous point.

That should be enough to cause a good degree of mahem. Who needs prohibited items?

Sylvia.

I own a hard plastic letter opener in the shape of a dagger. They were given away in large quantities at a trade seminar in Perth years ago. It would make a formidable weapon, but would not be detected by metal detecting devices.

Two years ago I was returning to Perth from a Bali holiday. I had bought a wooden wall hanger carving of a group of dolphins. It was flat, with many sharp edges. Another great weapon. It was too big to go in my baggage and I hadn't got around to wrapping it. I wondered if I would be allowed to take it on the plane until I saw a guy in front of me go through carrying a skateboard, probably a more powerful "hand weapon".

Instead of nit-picking about manicure sets etc, I believe that all international and major regional transit points should have the "see-through" machines which virtually make a person nude to the operator. I saw the video of the 7/11 terrorists going through airport security in the US prior to their attack. Such a machine could perhaps have prevented this tragedy.

We are told that "the people" would not accept these machines. I'm a civil libertarian. My greatest libertarian right is to be allowed to stay alive.

There is a way to beef up plane security against knike or sharp instrument attacks.The best form of defence is right in front of us in the form of a blanket.Make your personal blanket knife proof,perhaps with strong fibres.A group of passengers could overpower an assailant by using blankets as a shield and a tool for suppression.Perhaps a couple could be velcroed together and be more effective.

For a few extra dollars many things on a plane could have multiple uses in our fight against terrorism.Maybe a bullet proof blanket is possible.

There was never any reason to think that people on a plane have some special need to be protected against acts of random violence, as compared with people on the ground. The issue is only whether a person can use the prohibited items to hijack aircraft or destroy an aircraft, and if so, whether prohibiting those items prevents hijackings and aircraft destruction given the other options available to terrorists.

With the exception of firearms, it seems clear that a hijacker would not now succeed. An aircraft could be destroyed with explosives, but I rather think a similar result could be achieved with the permitted quantities of lighter fuel, alcohol and matches. In any case, as Bali and London showed there are easier targets to attack using explosives.

Sylvia.

So according to Sylvia people who travel by plane are elitest and should have no special treatment.The last time I looked Sylvia cheap airfares were beating car and bus travel.Well you have revealled your inherent leftist bias.Sylvia,plane travel was being targeted by terrorists because of the isolated insecure and dangerous nature of air travel.It needed special attention!

Perhaps you have been attending the Mark Lathem school of reality.