Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| reply to footballdude
Re: Yes
Secondly, how does a dispute between an airport and an airline involve the Bush administration? Thirdly, it looks like the only government agency involved (the FCC) is going to rule in favor of the free wi-fi, so where's the complaint? Fourthly, at what point did anyone mention 'national security'?"
The airport appears to be dragging out the old chestnut that was lionized and popularized by Bush and his administration as a catch-all excuse to justify any action that otherwise would get uncomfortably examined.
I'm guessing the complaint is that a lot of folks are tired of hearing the "national security" excuse for many reasons that don't seem to have any connection with national security at all.
Logan Airport stated early on that unrestricted wifi in the airport posed a national security risk but I don't recall any more elaboration beyond that (which suggested that their claim was dubious).
Yes, fifthly IS a word...*grin* |
|
cwy1980
Premium
join:2004-08-10
Monmouth Junction, NJ
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
| The most ironic part of this argument regarding Logan using the "security concerns" excuse is that, from a physical security perspective, cell phones are a FAR greater potential security concern than WiFi...
Poor Boston Logan Airport...all that revenue they lose from Continental's WiFi customers must really make them feel insecure...
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy |
|
