is Iran more free than Australia?

[winterbadger]

A deliberately provocative suggestion, but one could understand thinking that from today's headlines.

Flight ban for anti-Bush T-shirt

A passenger barred from a Qantas airlines flight for wearing a T-shirt depicting US President George Bush as a terrorist has threatened legal action. ... The T-shift features an image of President George W Bush, along with the slogan "World's Number One Terrorist". ... A Qantas spokesman defended the airline's decision, saying: "Whether made verbally or on a T-shirt, comments with the potential to offend other customers or threaten the security of a Qantas group aircraft will not be tolerated". [How does a shirt 'threaten the security of an aircraft'?]

Iranian cleric attacks president

Senior Iranian dissident cleric, Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, has attacked President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over nuclear issues and the economy. ... The grand ayatollah complained that people kept on shouting slogans about nuclear rights, but he asked: "Don't we have other rights too?"

It was a pointed reference to concerns about diminishing freedom of speech in Iran under Mr Ahmadinejad.

Comments

[candlelight1228.livejournal.com]

BTW, as an FYI, coming from someone who flies a lot, I hate the current enviroment. I hate that I can't carry onto flights a bottle of water. I have lost at least 2 bottles of water and almost a bottle of juice after a bit of a struggle with the security guys just so I could go back out and drink it down. It pisses me off to no end because I always have a bottle of water on me in case I get thirsty. As a student buying it at the airports is expensive so I don't care for that either. Personally, I feel that whole rule is just an attempt for people to make money, drive up prices (and fear, and and and and... However, again, where do you draw the line?

[winterbadger]

My impression is that the whole liquids thing was a reaction to the planned bombing of a flight using liquid or semi-liquid substances. Someoen in DHS said "OK, how are we going to convince people that we can prevent this happening in the future?" And they decided to just outright ban all liquid.

Of course, it's now gettign hedged and hedged and hedged. I imagine one of these days it will get entirely removed, but by then someone will have figured out how to make a bomb look like a book or a watch or a ham sandwich, and all those things will be banned as well.

I understand why it might feel like a money-making ploy but since there are waterfountains in most airports and free soft drinks on most flights (except budget ones :-), I really doubt that anyone went into that looking to make money.

I wouldn't mind BS like this if it really made anything safer. But I don't think it does; I think it just makes stupid people *feel* safer. And I'm fairly sure that's all it's supposed to do, which is annoying.

[candlelight1228.livejournal.com]

I get that but you have layovers still. And when some of us whom don't have as much money as others have to make a decision between whether we can drink or eat because we are no loner allowed to carry water with us... well I find that to be a problem.

Granted there are water fountains in airports but the water is crap. I like my filterd clean water, thank you.

Also, it worries me that they will, as you have already pointed out, get to the point of banning almost everything. I hate it already that I can't carry my makeup with me or my precious bottle of water and then if they go so far as to ban my computer or a book to read I think I will start taking trains and boats if I ever go anywhere.

It's ridiculous! Let's talk about that, if we are going to talk rights! ;)

[winterbadger]

Granted there are water fountains in airports but the water is crap. I like my filtered clean water, thank you.

*shrug* It isn't that bad, really, and--having worked in the water treatment industry in the past--I can assure you that despite what the people who make money selling you bottled water tell you, most commercial filtered water is not any "cleaner" than what comes out of the tap in most major urban areas in the First World. Usually what one pays for in bottled still water is (a) convenience (which one can get around by just buying a water bottle--security will not stop you for an empty water bottle) and (b) a fancy label. Sparkling water, yes, you have to buy that.

[candlelight1228.livejournal.com]

Maybe but I like the taste of Dasani and a few others. People tell me you can't taste water but if you drink enough of it you can. I remember when I was a kid going to my parents cabin in the mountains and the water would taste like Chlorine. We found out they put that in the water to cleanse it. I prefered bottled water since. And btw, I tend to just fill the water bottles with filtered water from the tap (we have a filtering system on it). But that's my point I can't walk into the airport with one of those. It just upsets me cause I am use to having certain freedoms from flying a lot before 9/11 and now all the new restrictions are a complete pain! Some of it I seriously wonder about....

[winterbadger]

I am, by the way, astonished that computers are still allowed on flights. DHS must be really 10% confident in their ability to detect actual explosive substances (C4, Semtex, etc.) because it's got to be terrifically easy to fit whatever electrical wiring and so on one needs for a detonator in a laptop and still have it function fine as a computer. Getting the explosive onto the plane is all that a suicide bomber needs to do to take out a major airliner, and that is too slight a challenge. Stopping a would-be bomber has to begin by identifying them and preventing them from reaching the plane, and that is a *very* tough job.

[candlelight1228.livejournal.com]

That may be true but my computer goes with me everywhere and I don't like letting it out of my site so I hope it never comes down to that.