U.S. Airports Adjust To New Security

Passengers Prepare For New Carry-On Restrictions; Wait Times Fall

(CBS/AP)  Incoming flights from London were delayed about 50 minutes at O'Hare, Urbanski said.

But she said people also didn't appear to be ditching their upcoming travel plans. "We are not seeing any change in bookings ... nothing out of ordinary," she said.

At Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, about 3,700 of an estimated 51,000 travelers missed their flights because of lines and delays on Thursday, when 164 flights were delayed, said airport spokesman Bob Parker.

Traffic was moving more smoothly at New York's major airports on Friday, where the morning flight delays were generally no more than 15 minutes, said Tiffany Townsend, a spokeswoman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

From London to Los Angeles, travelers on Thursday had found themselves unpacking carry-on bags on the floor in the terminals. Some tried to squeeze makeup, sunscreen and other toiletries into their checked baggage, where liquids were permissible. Others filled up the bins at security checkpoints, abandoning everything from nail polish to a bottle of tequila.

"I literally lost about $50 or $60 worth of things we were told to throw out," said Terry Asbury, who flew into Cincinnati from Albuquerque, N.M., and found herself dumping all her cosmetics.

At Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, Kristin Reinke, of Champlin, Minn., complained to her husband, Mike Reinke, "I just threw out $34 worth of hand lotion."

He was sympathetic, but accepted the Transportation Security Administration's reasons for the ban.

"What are you going to do?" he said. "I guess you have to be safe."

Amanda Volz, a TSA screener in Minneapolis, said she hoped more travelers would take that attitude Friday.

"There's some moaning and groaning, and a few people who get angry, but once you explain it to them, they are more lenient about giving it up," Volz said. "You just try to make them understand that it's for their safety."

The ban on liquids and gels covered such things as shampoo, toothpaste, contact lens solution, perfume and water bottles. The only exceptions were for baby formula and medications, which had to be presented for inspection at security checkpoints. Liquids are allowed in checked bags because those suitcases are screened for explosives and are stowed in the cargo hold beyond passengers' reach.

[misdiva21]

My name is Rachel and I was on a flight from traverse city to chicago, then from chicago to San Francisco. A time of five hours in the air and about three hours of checking in and layovers. I understand the need for the extra security, but nobody is talking about how they are taking away baby food in sealed jars. My seven month old's baby food was thrown out at security an hour before hour flight left, so that left me no food for her for about seven hours. Plus they will allow baby formula but they forget to let you know you cant bring the water ro mix the formula with. Does anybody else think this is wrong? My daughter was denied solid food until I could get in her bag that was checked in. Luckly a flight attendent gave me apple sauce and a passenger gave me a bananna, but at my daughters age she needs the extra solid food not strickly formula for eight hours. I just wanted to mention this and that it was not right! thank you rachel mccoy email address [e-mail]

[prp8396]

My wife and I both have the extreme "pleasure" of being business travelers. We spend 3 or 4 days of our lives, virtually every week, in airports all over the country. The sad fact of these new restrictions is that I don't feel any - I mean 0% - safer. I simply feel harassed.

It's ridiculous the number of hoops that people have to jump through just to fly anymore. The last saving grace of the exisitng system was, until 2 days ago, carry-on luggage. Now the government has removed the last shred of tolerability from airline travel for those of us who must travel constantly to earn a living. I'm tired of ineffectual knee-jerk reactionary policy. If the government wants to do something about terrorism, get out there in the world and do something. However, it's blatantly obvious that confiscating my lip balm, and the "War On Terror" will not, and cannot, accomplish anything.

As a lifetime conservative and Republican, I can honestly say that I can't wait for November of 2008. I'm seriously considering pulling a straight Democratic ticket. I'm tired of impotent leadership. The Democrats may raise my taxes, but it's funny how I always have more money in my pocket paying the higher Democratic taxes than I do when I pay the lower Republican ones.

Leave honest people alone, please! Stop fixing what isn't broken in the name of "safety," "security," and "terrorism." The methods are not working, and we aren't any safer.

[rihan156]

I wonder why there was no security system able to detect such threats as part of the security routine since 9/11; it's not supposed to bring us to the edge when such occurences happen. Media may help us keep it real...

Brits take it more lightly, "Terror scare an ace card for PM: When I heard that "they were planning to commit mass-murder on an unimaginable scale" I thought that war crimes indictments had at last been served on Messrs Bush and Blair. But, no; it was just another one of SY's "international terror plots" allegedly uncovered after months of patient and intrepid undercover work. "Something has happened," we were told by hyperventilating "security experts" on every UK TV channel. Yes, it certainly has. This sudden revelation of a Muslim terrorist threat to turn the sunny summer skies over the Atlantic into an airborne slaughterhouse comes at an extremely convenient moment, just when there are rising criticism and even revolt over the PM's handling of the MidEast crisis and his inflexible alignment with the US in the "war on terror". We know that Tony Bush and George Blair are joined at the hip. The perception is-and not just among British muslims-that US policy in the MidEast is skewed in favour of Israel and against the Palestinians. All we are doing is storing up anger and resentment for the future. The chickens are coming home to roost...
It is certainly the terrorists whom we should fear in the short term, but the long-term threat is from paranoid governments.

[anon123-2009]

Re: Bible comment

So exactly how many wars does the bible say there are left before the end of the world? We would like to know....

[BlueInWI]

Isn't it odd that this type of attack was thwarted in 1994 in Japan, yet we only start worrying about it now after the British thankfully broke this terrorist ring? Also, isn't odd how many repubs and dems are jumping on the bandwagon and trying to take credit for this success and over-reacting to try and look prepared. Midterm elections must be approaching.

Also, I though the $500,000,000,000 we have borrowed (so far) from the Chinese to Occupy Iraq was supposed to keep all the terrorists busy over there? Guess not? Or are we simply 'nation building' - another thing GW said he would never do.

Would sure be nice if our corporate news media complex would ask some of these questions...

[tonnie45]

Wake up America!!! It is not going to get any better. All of these wars have been foretold. Read the Bible, it's all there.

[ssharvey]

I feel safer when a man in front of me gets his shaving gel thrown away, so I don%u2019t mind it if they remove my toothpaste. They can remove anything they need to make sure no one is a terrorist trying to blow his own guts up. Why is the media referring to terrorist as martyrs? They are cold blooded murderers.

[kemig]

Actually after 9/11 I was surprised that we were allowed to carry anything on a plane. I think this is long overdue and am willing to put up with it. Will it stop all problems and terrorism risks on planes? Probably not, but it will make it more difficultand problematic. We just have to keep staying a step ahead I guess. But I am for the ban of taking anything on a plane.

[sara617]

How long is the American Republic going to allow fear to rule our streets? Because the American public fears terrorists we are letting our government to take away one civil liberty after another. Right now restrictions on carry on luggage doesn't seem that big of a concession for safety but as our liberties slowly dissappear so do our prespectives! One day it might be that a national curfew or censureship isn't such a large concession for safety. If the American public doesn't watch out soon we will have given up all of the liberties we hold dear for the sake of "safety". Take a look around and ask yourself is your fear allowing our government to take away your freedom?

[shaedreams]

I wish the new restrictions were being more widely distributed on radio stations, news, email blasts, etc., as I didn't even know about this today until I heard a co-worker talking about the ban. I am flying to Mexico for vacation in two weeks and hope this strict policy of no liquids is lifted by then. I didn't want to have to check ANY bags and take the chance of losing them in the Mexico airport, not to mention how long it takes to get your luggage in the Mexico airport. I am dreading our flight there. :o(