You can't go home again...

At least not very easily.

I had a wonderful visit in Saskatoon, SK thanks to gracious hosts, enthusiastic listeners, and remarkably mild weather.

But traveling back to the USA was something else.  I was aware that new security procedures were in place, but in case you have a trip coming up, let me 'splain what you're facing.  Keep in mind these steps are only on the way back to the US - not going.

• No carry-on luggage.  So plan on spending $20 (NW/Delta) for checking your roll-on.
• Because of the above restriction, you can't just whiz into a kiosk to check in since you need to get a luggage tag and turn it in.
  
• No large computer cases - mine just made it.
• I think they have the magnetometers set on "stun" because I've never had my watch or belt trip the alarm anywhere. Otherwise security screening is pretty much as before.
  
• After you clear security and head for your gate, there will be another obviously hastily created security check which entails the following:
• Emptying everything from your pockets.
• Removing belts, sweaters, and I think I saw heavy jewelry removed.
• A very thorough pat down by a security personnel.  They make a point to tell you they are using the backs of their hands to feel your pockets.  
• A vigorous groping of your shoes, collar, and beltline.
• Inspection of the soles of your shoes (which you had just removed a few minutes ago).
• Complete examination of the contents of your purse, computer bag, etc. - as in opening pill bottles, detailed examination of your computer, and making sure your small tape measure is really a tape measure.
• Repeated questions about liquids of any kind.
  
• After you have made it to the plane and taken off, brace yourself for the last 30-45 minutes. Nothing can be on your lap during that period.  I couldn't read my Kindle, or use the computer.  No tray tables, drinks, coats, blankets, etc.  (I'm not sure about books, but the guy next to me put his away.)
• No moving from your seat for any reason. (They warn you ahead of time)
• OK - you've arrived home (MSP in my case).  You go through customs/immigrations and pick up your checked baggage and then you...
• GO THROUGH SECURITY AGAIN. Even if you're just leaving the airport, I think, because I didn't see any other exit. Shoes, computer, liquids, etc.
  

[More official stuff here]

I hope I don't get in trouble telling you what happened, but I haven't seen any directives or received any instructions not to divulge what occurred, and everybody else was chattering to the folks who met them.  Other experiences are similar.  The new directive may also kill in-flight wi-fi just as it was getting going.

So, does this effectively kill off in-flight wireless internet services such as GoGo? What about in-flight video, like the Boing Boing Video channel on-board Virgin America, or Direct TV presentation of 24 hour news channels like CNN or MSNBC?
For what it's worth, when I flew back into the US on Saturday on an international Delta flight, the WiFi service which had been promised on the flight was disabled for the entire flight. When I asked attendants whether internet access was simply not working, or had been disabled, two attendants replied that WiFi is typically only offered during the last hour of the flight, and would not be available at all because of restrictions on "last hour" acvitity.

Some bloggers did apparently cross a line when they published an internal TSA directive.  

Soooo, if you don't hear from me for a while...

Anyhoo, after a million air miles, I'm really not complaining. But even though I noted this development last month, living with it is an adjustment.  Be prepared. 

I'd honestly allow an extra hour before takeoff coming home.

What he said...

I'm not looking forward to flying next month - thanks to security theater and hysterical politicians.  In fact, I think the better response is outlined by this expert.

But even as we do all of this we cannot neglect the feeling of security, because it's how we collectively overcome the psychological damage that terrorism causes. It's not security theater we need, it's direct appeals to our feelings. The best way to help people feel secure is by acting secure around them. Instead of reacting to terrorism with fear, we -- and our leaders -- need to react with indomitability, the kind of strength shown by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill during World War II.

By not overreacting, by not responding to movie-plot threats, and by not becoming defensive, we demonstrate the resilience of our society, in our laws, our culture, our freedoms. There is a difference between indomitability and arrogant "bring 'em on" rhetoric. There's a difference between accepting the inherent risk that comes with a free and open society, and hyping the threats.
We should treat terrorists like common criminals and give them all the benefits of true and open justice -- not merely because it demonstrates our indomitability, but because it makes us all safer.
Once a society starts circumventing its own laws, the risks to its future stability are much greater than terrorism.
Despite fearful rhetoric to the contrary, terrorism is not a transcendent threat. A terrorist attack cannot possibly destroy a country's way of life; it's only our reaction to that attack that can do that kind of damage. The more we undermine our own laws, the more we convert our buildings into fortresses, the more we reduce the freedoms and liberties at the foundation of our societies, the more we're doing the terrorists' job for them.
Today, we can project indomitability by rolling back all the fear-based post-9/11 security measures. Our leaders have lost credibility; getting it back requires a decrease in hyperbole. Ditch the invasive mass surveillance systems and new police state-like powers. Return airport security to pre-9/11 levels. Remove swagger from our foreign policies. Show the world that our legal system is up to the challenge of terrorism. Stop telling people to report all suspicious activity; it does little but make us suspicious of each other, increasing both fear and helplessness.
Counterterrorism is also hard, especially when we're psychologically prone to muck it up. Since 9/11, we've embarked on strategies of defending specific targets against specific tactics, overreacting to every terrorist video, stoking fear, demonizing ethnic groups, and treating the terrorists as if they were legitimate military opponents who could actually destroy a country or a way of life -- all of this plays into the hands of terrorists.
We'd do much better by leveraging the inherent strengths of our modern democracies and the natural advantages we have over the terrorists: our adaptability and survivability, our international network of laws and law enforcement, and the freedoms and liberties that make our society so enviable.

The way we live is open enough to make terrorists rare; we are observant enough to prevent most of the terrorist plots that exist, and indomitable enough to survive the even fewer terrorist plots that actually succeed. We don't need to pretend otherwise. [More]

Furthermore, I stand by my previous comments after 9/11. I refuse to lay awake worrying about explosive underwear when the stuff that will most likely kill me is already coating my arteries.

Now we know how...

Children feel about traveling.  Flying is approaching the equivalent of a car-seat for adults.

As part of the increased security, passengers on a flight Saturday from Brussels, Belgium, to Dulles Airport in Virginia were not allowed to leave their seats for the last hour of the flight, a traveler told CNN.
Niki Yazzie said the flight crew told the passengers that they had to remain in their seats with their seatbelts fastened and couldn't have any items, such as pillows or blankets, covering their laps; everything was stowed away.
Passenger Johnny McDonald, who was on a U.S. domestic flight, told CNN he saw officials X-ray milk parents had brought for infants and saw many people patted down.

"They X-rayed the milk I don't know how many times," McDonald said. "And then they took the milk out and sampled each and every bottle of the milk. I've never seen that before." [More]

This unfortunately predictable over-response to the latest incident will continue the hassle of air flight for businesses and even vacationers. I suspect more technology will be thrown at sales programs as opposed to face-to-face transactions.  We'll get used to it, but the airlines won't.

Meanwhile, the BIG story of the day is Iran.  But it isn't getting much coverage outside foreign press and bloggers, especially Andrew Sullivan.  If you think through what regime change could mean in Iran to the US, the possibilities on the upside are enormous.  

Then ponder what a less hostile, more productive Iran oil industry could mean to oil prices.  Defense spending?  Terrorist support?

More reasons to live in Edgar County, IL...

#26:  We actually missed a rain last night.  I am not making this up.

#27:  Safety from submarine attacks

Is it expensive to sink your own sub? Not if you're a drug lord. Each sub costs about $1 million to produce. The crew gets $500,000 or less. A recent 6.4-ton payload of cocaine was worth more than $100 million. As a percentage of the gross, subs are so cheap that they're routinely scuttled anyway.
That's the genius of submersibility. Several months ago, during the Israeli invasion of Gaza, we explored the terrestrial underworld of the Gaza tunnels. The tunnelers were developing a three-dimensional way of thinking about land: While one side built walls and stationed soldiers above ground, the other side went down 60 feet and dug past those barriers.
The nautical underworld is even better. You don't have to dig. You just glide. Even the semisubmersible crafts built by the drug lords are low enough to evade radar. And underwater, you can do something else that can't be done on land: dump your contraband and let gravity take it beyond your enemy's reach. No evidence, no conviction.
To stop this tactic, Congress recently enacted the Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act of 2008, which declares that anyone operating "any submersible vessel or semi-submersible vessel that is without nationality ... with the intent to evade detection, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."
Maybe that law will deter submarine drug commerce. But what about submarine terrorism? Ultimately, "U.S. officials fear that the rogue vessels could be used by terrorists intent on reaching the United States with deadly cargos," the Post reports. In fact, "Colombian officials say some former military personnel might be helping to design, construct and direct the vessels" used by the drug lords. If so, all that's needed is a financial lure from al-Qaida to build a vessel for a different mission.
It might not be a suicide mission, either. Drug submersible builders are "trying to develop a remote-controlled model," according to officials contacted by the Post. Two men were arrested last year, apparently while peddling this technology. No crew necessary. Just pack the radioactive bomb aboard your craft, slip it underwater, and hit any coastal target.

Think about that the next time you take off your shoes at an airport security gate. If we expect the next 9/11 attack to come from the sky, we may be looking the wrong way. [More]

While my history (I served aboard USS Seahorse SSN-669 back when subs had sails) predisposes me to find this threat credible, it does seem to make sense.  It also points out one more thing that is wrong with our drug policy (it makes drugs so lucrative that any cost is feasible for drug dealers) and also that if terrorists are the "Lex Luthors" Gitmo fans make them out to be, they probably are not planning a duplicate of 9-11.