Comments on: Baby food bollocks from the department of transport

By: Ms Mac

Ms Mac — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:09:36 +0000

Oh well, it gives something to moan about…

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 07:53:36 +0000

Oh, indeed. Arguing with airport security must be one of the most pointless and counter-productive things you can do. Isn’t it great that an underpaid, undertrained, overworked uniformed moron can really ruin your day because of inviolable rules that don’t actually exist?

By: Ms Mac

Ms Mac — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:58:30 +0000

But, is being armed with the rules any help anyway, when you’re actually at security and at the mercy of an underpaid, undertrained, overworked uniformed moron with a gun, the power to stop you from making your flight and who might be having a bad day? I think not.

By: Gary

Gary — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:48:46 +0000

Because the rules are nonsense?

What bugs me about this is that the department of transport chap doesn’t know what the rules are in the countries we fly to. Which is slightly scary.

Bonus fact: the actual EU rules on what you can take through security are secret (although they were leaked to a spanish newspaper). If you download the appropriate regulations, you get the law – but the detail’s in the annex, which is classified.

By: Ms Mac

Ms Mac — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:42:07 +0000

If it’s ok to taste baby food, then why is not just acceptable to prove that your bottle of water that you bought from the kiosk not 100m away from security is not liquid explosive by tasting it?

I’m not being facetious, I’m just a bit thick, see. I really want to know so if anyone can tell me…..

By: Squander Two

Squander Two — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:33:04 +0000

I’m never quite sure which is the bigger problem with the EU: that the unelected Commission gets to overrule Parliament, or that the Government gets to bypass the electorate by falsely claiming that the Commission has overruled Parliament.