This guy was on the terrorist watch list, but not the no-fly list. I guess the no-fly list was reserved for people who did things like write books critical of Bush.

I just got done with the previous post - the review of Star Trek - Generations. I think the guy that did that review should take a look at all of the anti-terrorism protocols that are currently in place, globally. I bet he might have a thing or two to say.

I wonder how many personal travel size items - shampoo, nail clippers, cuticle scissors, beverages - are available on eBay under the accounts of TSA employees.

Review: Shampoo exploded and burned off most of my scalp. Would not buy again.

May upset travelers? Kind of like when your head is blown off your shoulders. I hate it when that happens!

Personally, I might fedex all of my belongings and just show up in a bath towel. This way, they can scope my entire body while searching my purse, which would be the only thing I'd carry with my ticket inside. That should scare away lots of passengers. Or maybe not?

If Richard Reid was known as the shoe bomber, doesn't this guy have to be called the "crotch bomber"?

I fly quite a bit. I am totally ok with limiting the amount of things brought on board. If you have access to a shampoo bottle full of something flamable it is worse than 3 oz. I know it will never stop it, but it does make it more difficult. You left with having to strap a bomb to you genitials to get a enough to cause damage.

In fact, since the airlines starting charging for bags, the flying public brings more than ever onto the plane. I've always thought that it would be far more efficient to charge people to carry on things to the plane. People would bring on less and the boarding and deplaning would be much quicker.

Not so crazy about the one-hour rule, that's pretty meaningless and arbitrary. Instead of blowing the plane up on approach, which is clearly an attempt for a big show of it, they'd just as easily do it over the atlantic where it just go "missing" until they figured out what happened. Less PR for the bad guys...they don't like that.

Anyone catch Jean Meserve (sp?) on CNN yesterday. she was very animated and in all panic-inducing mode asking the 'serious' questions as to why TSA hadn't said anything about changing the rules. She somehow tied that the bush administration fought TSA being unionized so they could react to rule changes faster. I was curious how TSA rule changes could stop someone in Nigeria and Amsterdam from bringing things onto a plane heading to the US, but maybe that was in her next report after getting some medication. I swear there was a vein popping in her forehead.

Arriving at your airport- full body scan and pat downs.

This is ridiculous. The flight originated in NIGERIA, not here. It was not a failure of our security meassures.

The problem is a bureaucratic one-the guys father notified some embassy and alerted them to his son's problems and we still let him fly in here.

So now we're going to have to pay for this. More infrigement on our privacy and civil rights because we've become big fat scardy cats.

How about we all just fly in our underwear?

This will only lead to more fanancial trouble for airlines.

Excuse me sir, please remove your shoes and underwear before passing through security.

Here's to the bra bomber!

Did this guy use a lighter to try to set off the explosion? How did he catch on fire?

As a side note, this whole incident should come as absolutely no surprise to anybody who has ever flown into or out of Amsterdam...

Can someone explain why this is an "attempted terrorist attack" as opposed to a "terrorist attack"?

Is it because he did a shitty job and/or was thwarted by heroic passengers?

In seems that for all intents and purposes, this was an attack, not a mere attempt.