TexasCHLforum.com

don't see a relationship between the two circumstances.

Hurting or even killing someone with a pocket knife will not get you into the cockpit these days, and injuring or killing one or two people on a plane won't be perceived by anyone as justifying drone strikes in the U.S.

A pocketknife with a non-locking 2.36 inch blade also won't get you very far with flight crew or passengers. A determined attacker could slash a few people, but the post 9/11 response of the rest of the passengers would be overwhelming and decisive.

The TSA decision looks like just a rare moment of lucidity in line with the removal of the bans on things like eyebrow tweezers and hairpins. The motivation is being sold as risk based, but it appears more likely to be motivated by a desire to reduce workload and increase throughput at checkpoints by eliminating the need to open bags and confiscate things that have little potential weapon value.

Well I hope you are right but I dont necessarily agree with your assessment of the danger of pocket knives on planes now just because they have locks on doors and attitudes of people now being such that current flyers would not tolerate what happened on 9/11. If a group of attackers like on 9/11 had pocket knives to the throats of all of the flight attendants I would think that would be a serious threat, yes if there were enough able bodied people to form an attack on the terrorists than Im sure they could overcome them but at the expense of what the slit throats of all of the flight attendants. There are many people that wouldnt be able to overcome the mental hurdle of knowing that any attack would likely result in the death of the flight attendants.

Clearly the flight attendants union thinks that this is a serious issue this is a quote from them:
“Today’s announcement to permit knives back into the aircraft cabin is a poor and shortsighted decision by the TSA,” the group said in a statement. “As the last line of defense in the cabin and key aviation partners, we believe that these proposed changes will further endanger the lives of all flight attendants and the passengers we work so hard to keep safe and secure.”

How do you know that a pilot might not be convinced to open a cockpit door should one of his flight attendants be threatened to be killed by one of these atackers should he have a knife to her throat. The fact is there are most likely pilots out there that could be convinced to do so.

I would like to think that this could never happen again but I have seen plenty of situations on the news happen where groups of people were so afraid to get involved that they did nothing to render aid in a situation that called for it.

All I can say is I hope you are right.

I also have questioned the veracity of the article about 2700 tanks because I can find no mainstream media outlet even Drudge Report that can verify this claim. However I do not think it impossible, in fact I think it could be quite likely most of these large media outlet have long ago abandoned any real reporting and they are also all owned by a very few large companies. They may have been told to keep quiet about this, I dont know, but the one thing I wanted to point out is that the the most important part of the letter from Eric Holder was left out of this discussion:

"It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States. For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such fore if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstance of a catastrophic attack the like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001."

So whether this is true or not, I think it very concerning that just yesterday the TSA as you know announced that it was now legal to carry small pocket knives on planes. Now the reason that these knives have been banned is clearly because they are not really that different in terms of potential use as a weapon from box cutters. They both have a similar sized blade and could potentially be lethal if used in a hostage situation and clearly capable of doing great damage even taking down a pilot if used on someones jugular. So my question is this. If you look at the line in the quote above from Eric Holders letter to Rand Paul, it says that using military lethal force against American citizens would in Eric Holders mind be constitutional if there were to occur another terrorist attack such as 9/11. So why then would they be allowing these knives which for the past 10 years have been considered a danger all of a sudden to be o.k. It seems as if they are almost inviting another terrorist attack to have an excuse to declare martial law. This is very disconcerting and probably will be dismissed by most as black helicopter conspiracy but as we have seen a good majority of what was once considered conspiracy is no longer conspiracy.