Orlando airport after battery explodes in bag, causing panic and evacuation

[Rick Law]

November 11, 2017 (approx 5pm)

Long delays at Orlando airport after battery explodes in bag, causing panic and evacuation
...
“It was pandemonium,” he said. People sprinted past the security checkpoint to take cover.
...
According to the Orlando Police Department, the incident that prompted the delays was a lithium camera battery that overheated and exploded in the main terminal.
...

Above quoted from:
^{http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-airport-orlando-noise-scare-20171110-story.html}

[tooki]

And yet despite knowing it was just a noise, TSA cleared the airport, including recalling aircraft back to the gate to deplane and re-screen everyone... de facto shut down the airport for 4h. Makes no damned sense to me (other than in the context of security theatre, where making a show of "security" is more important than actual security...).

[Avacee]

It wasn't the battery that caused the TSA's reaction it was people running past the security screening to air-side.

The TSA couldn't take the chance that the battery incident hadn't been a diversion to enable someone with nefarious intent to get airside in the ensuing chaos.
Already de-gated planes were required to return to the gates in case said nefarious person has also got onto the apron.

If panicking people hadn't gone past security it would have been resolved a lot quicker.

Whilst, with the benefit of hindsight, I do think security (especially american) often over-reacts and I would have mightily pissed off if my plane had been cancelled/delayed I can understand the decision making/procedures used.

And now I've put on my flame suit ready for everyone telling me I'm an apologist for the government and am a brain-washed sheep with no independent thought who believes the fake news/mainstream media.

[Mr. Scram]

We've reached the point where our own actions do the damage, rather than those of our enemies. Considering that has been their goal from the beginning, we're not doing too well.

[tooki]

It wasn't the battery that caused the TSA's reaction it was people running past the security screening to air-side.

The TSA couldn't take the chance that the battery incident hadn't been a diversion to enable someone with nefarious intent to get airside in the ensuing chaos.
Already de-gated planes were required to return to the gates in case said nefarious person has also got onto the apron.

If panicking people hadn't gone past security it would have been resolved a lot quicker.

Whilst, with the benefit of hindsight, I do think security (especially american) often over-reacts and I would have mightily pissed off if my plane had been cancelled/delayed I can understand the decision making/procedures used.

And now I've put on my flame suit ready for everyone telling me I'm an apologist for the government and am a brain-washed sheep with no independent thought who believes the fake news/mainstream media.

Ohhhhh, from the reports I'd read, I didn't realize that unscreened pax had gone to the sterile side. That makes sense then. (Re-screening the terminal that is. Re-screening the pax already on airplanes seems kinda ridiculous all the same.)

We've reached the point where our own actions do the damage, rather than those of our enemies. Considering that has been their goal from the beginning, we're not doing too well.

^^^^This x10^9. People forget the "terror" in "terrorism" -- the goal isn't to cause damage, it's to cause us to live in fear. In this sense, with regards to USA (and UK), the terrorists have won in spectacular style.

[bd139]

No one visibly gives a fuck here in the UK apart from people who's job it is to give a fuck about it. That's SOP here

Having got stuck in the whole 7/7 bomb thing, most people were just annoyed about not being able to get home or there being a coffee drought than actually worrying about being blown up.

[Halcyon]

It wasn't the battery that caused the TSA's reaction it was people running past the security screening to air-side.

The TSA couldn't take the chance that the battery incident hadn't been a diversion to enable someone with nefarious intent to get airside in the ensuing chaos.
Already de-gated planes were required to return to the gates in case said nefarious person has also got onto the apron.

If panicking people hadn't gone past security it would have been resolved a lot quicker.

Whilst, with the benefit of hindsight, I do think security (especially american) often over-reacts and I would have mightily pissed off if my plane had been cancelled/delayed I can understand the decision making/procedures used.

And now I've put on my flame suit ready for everyone telling me I'm an apologist for the government and am a brain-washed sheep with no independent thought who believes the fake news/mainstream media.

Nope, you are absolutely spot on! At least according to the Government and Law Enforcement agencies in Australia. It's this kind of mentality that keeps us safe. Police aren't just trained to respond to the immediate scene, but to "stand back" and look at the bigger possibilities.

No one likes delays, but I'd much rather my flight be re-scheduled than having to face a real threat whilst in the air.

[dmills]

About the size of it.
I never did understand why the "Islamic" terrorists are seen as being more of an issue then the IRA was? They were actually good at it.

The **NICE** thing about suicide bombers is that they are all by definition inexperienced amateurs, and the thing has to be kind of self limiting, really not worth worrying about.

These clowns using vehicles in crowds are an unfortunate development, but still small beer in the scheme of things.

Regards, Dan.

[bd139]

IRA were very good. This is the truth...

[BradC]

No one likes delays, but I'd much rather my flight be re-scheduled than having to face a real threat whilst in the air.

Tipping a lounge has serious financial impacts on an airline and follow on with the airport operator. They like it even less than we do, but as others have said it can pose a very real threat. They really only do it if they have no other choice.

[BradC]

About the size of it.
I never did understand why the "Islamic" terrorists are seen as being more of an issue then the IRA was? They were actually good at it.

The **NICE** thing about suicide bombers is that they are all by definition inexperienced amateurs, and the thing has to be kind of self limiting, really not worth worrying about.

Unfortunately it's not necessarily small beer when they get control of an aircraft with a couple of hundred people and eleventy millions tons of Jet A on board. It's one of those "once bitten twice shy" things. While the US has devolved and the TSA are generally held as a laughing stock globally, developed countries routinely intercept real threats that don't make the news.

[tszaboo]

IRA were very good. This is the truth...

Number of deaths in Hungary due to terrorism:
1970-2017: 0
I'm not gonna post any other statistics, as it would assume a causality.

[Cerebus]

We've reached the point where our own actions do the damage, rather than those of our enemies. Considering that has been their goal from the beginning, we're not doing too well.

That's obvious to thee, me and anyone with half a brain but the government types seem to have forgotten that terrorism is asymmetric warfare designed to induce fear. If you don't have the resources to deliver effective military blows you put the effort into terrorising your enemy and let them do the damage for you.

If, as a target government, you over-react on every opportunity possible, and continue over-reacting to specific tactics well after any individual style of threat has lost any real effectiveness (because you now know about it) you're acting as a force multiplier for the enemy. Our governments respond to every new tactic by creating new highly specific laws, and institutionalizing ineffective but highly visible security measures. Instead of defusing the tactics by reassuring the public, they potentiate the tactics by introducing as many continual reminders of the threat as possible.

It's quite easy to see why the conspiracy nuts think these things are an 'inside job' because the official response is exactly what you would do if you wanted to spread fear and instil a sense that you need a repressive government to protect you from the apparently massive outside threat. Less romantically the real government motivation is stupidity, incompetence and, in a small number of cases, opportunism to extend some department's budget or power.

[cprobertson1]

If, as a target government, you over-react on every opportunity possible, and continue over-reacting to specific tactics well after any individual style of threat has lost any real effectiveness (because you now know about it) you're acting as a force multiplier for the enemy. Our governments respond to every new tactic by creating new highly specific laws, and institutionalizing ineffective but highly visible security measures. Instead of defusing the tactics by reassuring the public, they potentiate the tactics by introducing as many continual reminders of the threat as possible.

That said, security theatre is reassuring to many. Somebody being seen to do something makes you feel safe - even if it is a bit illusionary (please note this is not decrying the other agencies who actually do stop terrorists on a fairly regular basis).

In some ways it ties back to the media portrayal of counterterrorism: "airport grinds to halt while security double check everything in case of suspected terrorist attack" sounds impressive, it sounds like we're in control - it's good - it's reassuring, and most of all, it's very visible to any observer it...

Now compare that to... "Investigators spend 18 months following paper trails, cooperating with international agencies, conducting espionage, intercepting communication, and navigating political minefields before signing off on the paperwork to authorise the raid on some suspected terrorists".

Much less impressive. It was a lot of work just understanding it all - and the timescale makes us look bad. Most of it happened quietly and invisibly behind closed doors. The number of agencies involved makes us look weak. It makes us look like we aren't really in control...

And even worse, it makes a pretty poor headline...

[Cerebus]

No one visibly gives a fuck here in the UK apart from people who's job it is to give a fuck about it. That's SOP here

Having got stuck in the whole 7/7 bomb thing, most people were just annoyed about not being able to get home or there being a coffee drought than actually worrying about being blown up.

One can make a Darwinian argument here.

In the second world war London got the arse bombed out of it. In a bombing raid the quickest way to get killed is to run around like a headless chicken, the best way to stay alive is to remain relatively calm and find cover. So those (common people) who survived the WWII Blitz were those genetically predisposed to relative calmness in the fact of danger.

On the other hand, the ruling classes were either in their country homes or in bunkers under Westminster. So they suffered no evolutionary pressure from the Blitz that bred out the instincts that cause fear-driven deaths.

So we reach the current day, where the common people (i.e. thee and me) say "keep calm and carry on, it's not a significant threat" and the ruling classes run around like headless chickens who think the sky is falling and legislate for sky wardens, the pointless building of sky props and a standing sky defence force^*.

*This not a mixed metaphor, it's a scrambled [egg] metaphor.

[bd139]

Interesting point there!

[voltsandjolts]

IRA were very good. This is the truth...

Number of deaths in Hungary due to terrorism:
1970-2017: 0
I'm not gonna post any other statistics, as it would assume a causality.

Eh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Budapest_bombing

[tszaboo]

IRA were very good. This is the truth...

Number of deaths in Hungary due to terrorism:
1970-2017: 0
I'm not gonna post any other statistics, as it would assume a causality.

Eh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Budapest_bombing

1. It was a nutjob, and not a terrorist
2. Nobody died

[Mr. Scram]

One can make a Darwinian argument here.

In the second world war London got the arse bombed out of it. In a bombing raid the quickest way to get killed is to run around like a headless chicken, the best way to stay alive is to remain relatively calm and find cover. So those (common people) who survived the WWII Blitz were those genetically predisposed to relative calmness in the fact of danger.

On the other hand, the ruling classes were either in their country homes or in bunkers under Westminster. So they suffered no evolutionary pressure from the Blitz that bred out the instincts that cause fear-driven deaths.

So we reach the current day, where the common people (i.e. thee and me) say "keep calm and carry on, it's not a significant threat" and the ruling classes run around like headless chickens who think the sky is falling and legislate for sky wardens, the pointless building of sky props and a standing sky defence force^*.

*This not a mixed metaphor, it's a scrambled [egg] metaphor.

Even though it's a compelling story, I doubt that such a immediate, profound and lasting effect can be seen. Not in small part because the bombs simply fell where they did. Being calm or smart doesn't save you, which is one of the cruelties of war.

Obviously, I would love any statistics that make the argument.

[Mr. Scram]

No one visibly gives a fuck here in the UK apart from people who's job it is to give a fuck about it. That's SOP here

Having got stuck in the whole 7/7 bomb thing, most people were just annoyed about not being able to get home or there being a coffee drought than actually worrying about being blown up.

I have to disagree there. Even though the general public might carry on with their lives, the response of society has been to introduce and support a number of laws in the name of national security which could easily be classified as draconic.

[EEVblog]

And yet despite knowing it was just a noise, TSA cleared the airport, including recalling aircraft back to the gate to deplane and re-screen everyone... de facto shut down the airport for 4h. Makes no damned sense to me (other than in the context of security theatre, where making a show of "security" is more important than actual security...).

That's madness, let the planes take off.

[voltsandjolts]

1. It was a nutjob, and not a terrorist

There is no difference my friend.

[EEVblog]

NOTICE: Keep this thread on track or it gets locked or off-topic political posts deleted.

[Cerebus]

That said, security theatre is reassuring to many.
...
And even worse, it makes a pretty poor headline...

I don't disagree with a word of that, but you omit what seems to be the natural conclusion to your argument: "That it's all about appearances."

Given a choice between "looking good but still allowing people to be terrified" and "quietly getting on with the job of prevention and reassuring people" I know which seems preferable to me.

In the UK we have some concrete past examples to draw on, the whole IRA thing. The IRA actually blew up the hotel that Maggie Thatcher and most of the cabinet were staying in during the 1984 Conservative Party Conference. This led to exactly zero laws being created or modified, let alone on a knee jerk. Yet nowadays every terrorist incident, no matter how minor, generates immediate calls for new laws and often gets them. (It did lead to changes in security for Party Political conferences, but they were mostly subtle, largely unseen by the public, and most importantly, only inconvenienced people who were physically near the conferences, and were conducted as quietly as possible not as pieces of grand theatre. Some things were publicly visible but like a duck, most of the real action was going on under the water line.)

[Cerebus]

Even though it's a compelling story, I doubt that such a immediate, profound and lasting effect can be seen. Not in small part because the bombs simply fell where they did. Being calm or smart doesn't save you, which is one of the cruelties of war.

Obviously, I would love any statistics that make the argument.

Not really meant to be taken seriously, except as a social parable.

[bd139]

No one visibly gives a fuck here in the UK apart from people who's job it is to give a fuck about it. That's SOP here

Having got stuck in the whole 7/7 bomb thing, most people were just annoyed about not being able to get home or there being a coffee drought than actually worrying about being blown up.

I have to disagree there. Even though the general public might carry on with their lives, the response of society has been to introduce and support a number of laws in the name of national security which could easily be classified as draconic.

No one gives a fuck about them either. If the tea or biscuits get spilled we’ll kick off but not before. Laws are “recommendations” here.

[Cerebus]

1. It was a nutjob, and not a terrorist

There is no difference my friend.

Every difference. If by 'nutjob' we genuinely mean someone with a psychiatric illness, then one should lead to an examination of public provision for the treatment of mental illness and why this person "fell through the cracks" and the other is a very different kettle of fish. They might both have political solutions but motivationally and morally they are worlds apart.

[tszaboo]

1. It was a nutjob, and not a terrorist

There is no difference my friend.

That is actually very true.
In any case, it was a local, certified nutjob, working alone. They found unsent emails trying to bribe the govmt. for money, and they claimed he wanted to take the sidearms of the unfortunate policewoman injured.

[Mr. Scram]

Not really meant to be taken seriously, except as a social parable.

Sorry, I mistook it for a more factual story. It's hard to distinguish these things on the web sometimes.

[Mr. Scram]

No one gives a fuck about them either. If the tea or biscuits get spilled we’ll kick off but not before. Laws are “recommendations” here.

I don't think the three people convicted for not devulging their encryption passwords would fully agree. Though the GCHQ might indeed agree

[tszaboo]

NOTICE: Keep this thread on track or it gets locked or off-topic political posts deleted.

I predict, that this thread will be locked in about 2 pages.
I'm surprised, that the other one, discussing sexism isn't locked yet.

[madires]

Another tidbit:

TSA fails most tests in latest undercover operation at US airports:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-operation-us-airports/story?id=51022188

[Mr. Scram]

Another tidbit:

TSA fails most tests in latest undercover operation at US airports:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-operation-us-airports/story?id=51022188

If memory serves me, they consistently fail these tests.

[CJay]

Whilst, with the benefit of hindsight, I do think security (especially american) often over-reacts and I would have mightily pissed off if my plane had been cancelled/delayed I can understand the decision making/procedures used.

I am lead to believe, by a commercial pilot acquaintance, that it's easier to get into and out of China and Russia than America these days, so scared are the TSA

[tooki]

The thing is, all this security theater robs us of real rights, and it distracts from real dangers. I'd rather that passengers be less haggard (after all the airport inconvenience) and more alert, which could observe real danger.

As for me, I'm flying to USA soon, and am looking forward to seeing how much time Global Entry (which includes TSA Pre-Check) saves in Newark. At least I'll be able to leave my shoes on and gadgets in the bag.

[Cerebus]

The thing is, all this security theater robs us of real rights, and it distracts from real dangers. I'd rather that passengers be less haggard (after all the airport inconvenience) and more alert, which could observe real danger.

I'll go on record as saying that I refuse to travel to the US nowadays. The security theatre carries a real risk to harmless, legitimate travellers like myself that they can find themselves detained in some apparently constitution and law free zone if they aren't uber-deferential to the TSA goons, or do something silly like insisting on their rights, or have a common name (like David Jones) that has found its way onto a watch list. I regard the risk from the TSA and the official paranoia and fear, as far in excess of of the risk from any actual terrorists. I wonder what the economic cost is in tourism and trade from people who think like me has been to the US (and other countries that kowtow to their neurotic version of security).

[CJay]

The thing is, all this security theater robs us of real rights, and it distracts from real dangers. I'd rather that passengers be less haggard (after all the airport inconvenience) and more alert, which could observe real danger.

As for me, I'm flying to USA soon, and am looking forward to seeing how much time Global Entry (which includes TSA Pre-Check) saves in Newark. At least I'll be able to leave my shoes on and gadgets in the bag.

Good grief, we agree on something

Yes, the whole 'you're gonna die because we can't read your emails/twitter/facebook/whatsapp' is a ridiculous price to pay for the vanishingly small risk of being involved in a terrorist incident.

Privacy seems to be becoming a commodity that is only afforded to those who are rich enough to buy it though if it could be guaranteed that all politician's, public figure's, media mogul's data were subject to the same level of scrutiny and exposure I might consider it a price almost worth paying (joking, everyone is entitled to privacy, the argument 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' is a vile joke used to persuade the hard of thinking that constant intrusion is necessary to protect them)

[tooki]

The thing is, all this security theater robs us of real rights, and it distracts from real dangers. I'd rather that passengers be less haggard (after all the airport inconvenience) and more alert, which could observe real danger.

I'll go on record as saying that I refuse to travel to the US nowadays. The security theatre carries a real risk to harmless, legitimate travellers like myself that they can find themselves detained in some apparently constitution and law free zone if they aren't uber-deferential to the TSA goons, or do something silly like insisting on their rights, or have a common name (like David Jones) that has found its way onto a watch list. I regard the risk from the TSA and the official paranoia and fear, as far in excess of of the risk from any actual terrorists. I wonder what the economic cost is in tourism and trade from people who think like me has been to the US (and other countries that kowtow to their neurotic version of security).

Though I fundamentally agree with you, just a little clarification, you’re confusing TSA and CBP.

TSA is a largely merely annoying troupe that takes your water and butter knives and ogles you on the perv scanners. But TSA agents have no power to arrest you, they must call police. You encounter TSA at security screening only.

CBP (customs and border patrol) is a law enforcement agency, and you encounter them on arrival into USA. They have broad enforcement powers and can detain you. And from what 45 has told them to do, I dot blame foreigners who don’t wanna deal with it.

For me, I’m American and want to visit home, and as a citizen I’m far less likely to be scrutinized anyway. But I totally understand foreigners saying “screw that, I’ll go somewhere welcoming”.

[iainwhite]

As for me, I'm flying to USA soon, and am looking forward to seeing how much time Global Entry (which includes TSA Pre-Check) saves in Newark. At least I'll be able to leave my shoes on and gadgets in the bag.

Global entry usually saves me a ton of time returning to the US at Newark.   You go thru special lanes and use a computerized system that photographs you and gives you a receipt that you hand in at the exit. Apart from one time when the photo part went wrong, I have consistently gone straight thru in maybe 5-10 mins.

[Cerebus]

Though I fundamentally agree with you, just a little clarification, you’re confusing TSA and CBP.

Yeah, I wasn't making any real efforts to be precise, just using "TSA" as shorthand for goons in uniform in general.

[tooki]

As for me, I'm flying to USA soon, and am looking forward to seeing how much time Global Entry (which includes TSA Pre-Check) saves in Newark. At least I'll be able to leave my shoes on and gadgets in the bag.

Global entry usually saves me a ton of time returning to the US at Newark.   You go thru special lanes and use a computerized system that photographs you and gives you a receipt that you hand in at the exit. Apart from one time when the photo part went wrong, I have consistently gone straight thru in maybe 5-10 mins.

Cool, glad to hear that. I’m especially curious how the TSA Pre-Check lines are, since I have a connecting flight and thus must clear security again. (Usually I’ve found the immigration to go quickly, but a longer line at customs/agriculture. I’m hoping Global Entry helps there.)

[iainwhite]

Cool, glad to hear that. I’m especially curious how the TSA Pre-Check lines are, since I have a connecting flight and thus must clear security again. (Usually I’ve found the immigration to go quickly, but a longer line at customs/agriculture. I’m hoping Global Entry helps there.)

TSA-Pre is faster than the regular security lines, and somewhat faster than the fast-track Frequent-flier lines at Newark.
The problem is that so many people have TSA-pre now that the lines get quite crowded, compared to say 5 years ago.

Customs is handled on entry to the US, not at security, and is fast-tracked for Global entry members - there is a special line that allows you to bypass the regular line (at least there is at terminal B)  - you go thru the Global Entry machines at immigration, then downstairs to the baggage pickup, then out thru customs in the special line.

[IanMacdonald]

I think it has to be remembered that the purpose of terrorism is not specifically to cause death. It is to cause disruption.

[BradC]

I think it has to be remembered that the purpose of terrorism is not specifically to cause death. It is to cause disruption.

It's really about causing fear / terror. That whole "keep looking over your shoulder as you don't know if you'll be next". Thankfully a majority of the world is apathetic enough that it doesn't really work as well as intended. A side affect however is the continual "plugging of holes" approach to security and the resulting disruption that causes.

[Mr. Scram]

It's really about causing fear / terror. That whole "keep looking over your shoulder as you don't know if you'll be next". Thankfully a majority of the world is apathetic enough that it doesn't really work as well as intended. A side affect however is the continual "plugging of holes" approach to security and the resulting disruption that causes.

That disruption is an instrument. Terrorists know that it's not possible for them to directly damage our society and the values we hold dear. That's why they need to manipulate us into doing it ourselves. We can do a lot more damage than any terrorist group ever can. Therefore, instead of a direct attack, they strike fear in our hearts, causing us to lash out and strangle ourselves more and more, until nothing of value is left. You can't protect what you cherish by destroying it, yet that seems exactly what we're doing. Another effect is that attacks polarize society. Nuance is the death of extremisms, in both the literal and practical sense, so they try to eliminate the middle ground. When nuance and reason go, the only things left aren't very pleasant.

Though the attackers themselves might not be aware of the political purposes of these attacks, you can be very sure the extremist top brass knows exactly what they're doing. These are highly educated people, often with a background in the military or politics. It's not just a bunch of guys with guns in the desert.

[tszaboo]

Doh.

[Cerebus]

It's not just a bunch of guys with guns in the desert.

No usually the top guys dont even have guns. They only have beards.
And infinite hatred towards infidels, aka people who have brains and free will to decide for themselves.

It's not as simplistic as that.

By reducing a very complex situation to 'they hate us', you kind of prove Scram's point (in the very same message you quote from, no less):

Nuance is the death of extremisms, in both the literal and practical sense, so they try to eliminate the middle ground. When nuance and reason go, the only things left aren't very pleasant.

We'll never get out of this mire if both sides just reduce the whole thing to 'they hate us, so it's OK to kill them'.

[tszaboo]

Doh

[Lord of nothing]

Dont worry there are just single incidents!
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_rNT3k2ZXB-f9z-2nSFMIBQKXCs&hl=en_US&ll=50.39070659634407%2C17.384760695996192&z=5

[Cerebus]

I'm not going to answer directly to this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Buda_(1541)
Fool me once...

Normally I'd applaud a historical reference (because "Those who don't learn history are condemned to repeat..." ) but that's a pretty poor defence of the implied argument that the Ottomans/Turks/modern-day-men-with-beards are out to get us, end of argument, no need for any subtlety or nuance in discussing it. That's pretty much just a re-run of The Siege of Troy with one or two details changed. So presumably you're advocating an un-nuanced eradication campaign again the Greeks as well, on the basis of 'they've got history for this sort of thing'*?

*Obviously if one added "the songs of Demis Roussos" into the evidence against the Greeks one might have a cogent argument for invasion, but I digress. 

[Lord of nothing]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Vienna

[Mr. Scram]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Vienna

Would you mind taking your agenda somewhere else, instead of murdering an innocent thread with it?

And please, don't just drop links or hint at things. We're a civilized forum. Express your opinions appropriately.

[tszaboo]

Doh.

[Mr. Scram]

Though I was born 50km from Budapest, and not troy...
No, I'm not advocating genocide, or even death sentence for terrorist. I'm fine with just walling ourselves ups, until the man in beards got civilized. I'm not even islamophobic. If someone is civilized, dont have hatred agains us, accepts that people are equal, running from the shitstorm at home, wants to behave, OK. Welcome.
Everyone else , who wants to fight a holy war, and they bring it with themselves. That is the issue. It is just not compatible with our way of life.

After the Paris attacks, there were people celebrating on my street. How am I supposed to live together with these people? Its just the one percent, but still.

Again, oversimplifying things isn't going to better the issue, not to mention political walls never server their purpose in history. It's also hugely off-topic.

[tooki]

TSA-Pre is faster than the regular security lines, and somewhat faster than the fast-track Frequent-flier lines at Newark.
The problem is that so many people have TSA-pre now that the lines get quite crowded, compared to say 5 years ago.

Makes sense. I assume that by the frequent-flier lanes, you mean that Clear-somethingorother?

Customs is handled on entry to the US, not at security, and is fast-tracked for Global entry members - there is a special line that allows you to bypass the regular line (at least there is at terminal B)  - you go thru the Global Entry machines at immigration, then downstairs to the baggage pickup, then out thru customs in the special line.

I know, that’s why I mentioned them all individually by name. I’ve flown through Newark many, many times, but never with Global Entry before.

As for me, I'm flying to USA soon, and am looking forward to seeing how much time Global Entry (which includes TSA Pre-Check) saves in Newark. At least I'll be able to leave my shoes on and gadgets in the bag.

The verdict: absolutely worth it. From stepping off the plane to exiting customs with my baggage (which had to be x-rayed at customs again since I was bringing cheese and declared it), 10 minutes. (Thanks also to United premier status, which gives me priority baggage handling too.)

I went through security at a tiny checkpoint in terminal A, there was nobody in line ahead of me in the TSA Pre line. (I’m used to going through security at terminal C, so it’s not a fair comparison. Oh well.)

From deplaning to arriving at my connecting gate, under 40 minutes, and that was taking it leisurely.

[iainwhite]

From deplaning to arriving at my connecting gate, under 40 minutes, and that was taking it leisurely.

I am very glad to hear that!

[boffin]

[Mr. Scram]

Maybe another angle would be interesting. What alternative technologies exist in regards to rechargeable batteries and has anyone used any in projects or for other purposes? I've looked into this a while back and even though many options are dangerous or restricted, some seem promising without major drawbacks or even with some advantages.

For instance, lithium iron phosphate seems to be a safer and more durable technology, with the only drawback being less energy density and maybe cost. That might be a deal breaker when designing the new iPhone, but wouldn't matter in many projects.

[CJay]

Hah, that's brilliant, shame it's a fake.

[tooki]

Hah, that's brilliant, shame it's a fake.

The real one would have used yuge instead of huge.

Nah man, he only pronounces it that way!