I picked a hell of a day to travel!

Today, I left JFK to go to a conference in Denver Vail, Colorado– and let me tell you, it could have been a lot worse.

We got to airport extra early, whizzed thru security, and departed on time.

More on the conference later this weekend . . .

>

UPDATE August 11, 2006 6:17am (4:17 local time)

We moved all of our liquids to our carry on luggage, which we then checked. Denver International has the fastest luggage claim I have efver seen — by the time we got to the baggage carousel, the bags were already doing the lazy circle.

Category: Weblogs

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

16 Responses to “Made it to Vail!”

  1. whipsaw says:

    glad you made it and glad that you are among the minyans, but am more conerned about why my company says to our international travellers that it would be understandable if they were concerned about travelling, but clients come first, so tough.

    The contrast is with a different CEO who after 9/11 ordered everybody home regardless of the transport or the cost and told everybody in the company to take their family out to dinner to sort things out and the corp would cover up to $100 of the bill. Agreed that a threat and an attack are different things, but that doesn’t excuse ordering some 22 year old consultant who was 17 when all of that happened to keep getting on planes.

  2. muckdog says:

    Left the hair gel and toothpaste at home, did ya?

  3. Kevin says:

    Off topic but it needs to be said:
    “Thank you and good work” to everyone involved in stopping the planned attack. Both to those whose work we know about and those who need to remain unacknowledged.

  4. whipsaw says:

    per Kevin:
    “Off topic but it needs to be said:
    “Thank you and good work” to everyone involved in stopping the planned attack. Both to those whose work we know about and those who need to remain unacknowledged.”

    agreed if it doesn’t turn out to be out yet another convenient lie. There is a certain smell about the entire episode that seems rather famiilar (in fact the smell goes back to vietnam).

  5. Bob A says:

    I agree Whipsaw … was this plot ‘real’ or was it more ‘WMD’s in Irag’ or ‘Uranium from Niger’… an election year creation of Karl Rove and the Fox News team to take attention away from Joe Loserman’s defeat.

  6. philip says:

    the quote: “was this plot ‘real’ or was it more ‘WMD’s in Irag’ “r ‘Uranium from Niger’… an election year creation of Karl Rove and the Fox News team to take attention away from Joe Loserman’s defeat.”

    The script:

    “Hello, this is Pakistani Intelligence, Mohammed speaking. What?!?!? Joe Lieberman lost the Connecticut Democratic Primary? We’ll get right on it! Boys, go arrest somebody in conjunction with British Intelligence.” Yeah.

    You really do sound that silly when you say things like that.

  7. Joe Liarman says:

    stupid enough to get us into Iraq but clever enough to put British Intelligence (oxymoron?) on a tight media deadline? does seem rather farfetched but our crap er crack corporate-owned media will sort out the truth so no worries.

  8. Leisa says:

    This reminds me a bit of the foiled Sears Tower plot. It has the smell of a convenient story. I admit, though, to feeling a little slimy for having had the same scepticism that Whipsaw articulated.

    Re the Denver airport….I’ve been through there several times. Very easy to get in/out–though it is so far away from the city!

  9. tjofpa says:

    Joe gets booted from the senate(NeoCons losing their grip)
    Next day;
    he’s running as Indi (just to thank his dem friends)
    Israelies massing on the border(NOT pulling out)
    Next day;
    Terror plot uncovered (seems many knew it was coming)
    New rhetoric unleased – “Islamic Fascists” (I don’t even know what that means)

    I’m getting a real bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that wahatever they’re going to do, they’re going to do before Nov.

  10. DBLWYO says:

    BR – you’re lucky it wasn’t ski season or you’d get to wait for hours while all the skis and extra luggage got jammed up. You should have gone thru Denver when they were still de-bugging the luggage system software – complete fiasco. Worst example of large-scale system integration we could find for classroom examples. Took years to straighten out.

  11. S says:

    I can only imagine what kind of brainless, idiotic conspiracy theories you would be promoting if the terrorists had actually succeeded in their plans. Excuse me while I go puke after reading these comments.

  12. Kevin says:

    I’m going to have to side with Leisa on this one. It does kind of smack of the Sears Tower “plot.” It’s a convenient story that will dominate the headlines for the next few days. Who knows how far along the planning was or how skilled the plotters were. That’s the problem with a story like this when the government has no credibility. I wish I could believe with 100% certainty that this is a huge victory for the forces of good, but we’ve been burned too many times.

  13. NotAPro says:

    Well there was no conspiracy I think, but the terrorist threat was used politically. GWB knew about this last weekend, and certainly by Wed. On Wed, Lieberman and Cheney both make some provocative comments regarding Lamont & Democracts. The standard Dem = weak on terrorism, a charge I simply don’t understand.

    Then on Thursday they hit the big panic button. Political ruthlesness at its best. This terrorist cell was well infilitrated, as far as I can tell there was no real threat, they had these guys’ number, but hell lets ban all liquids. I’m sure that will make us all safer.

    This plot is nearly identical to the Bojinka plot of the 90′s planned by Yousef. All security authorities knew about the possibility of the use of a liquid explosive. So why are they only banned now, and not since 9/11 for example?

  14. tjofpa says:

    We don’t have to imagine Brainless and Idiotic; we’ve already seen them at their best.
    “If we fool em into believing Sadam’s got WMD and supports terror, we can plunge the US into an unwinnable, perpetual war the precise perameters of which my father DOCUMENTED in his book.”

    Oh hell, just give me summore tax cuts and I’ll believe and support anythig u’ve got to say.

  15. Bob A says:

    Oh and … the suspected terrorists were shuttling to PAKISTAN not Irag to raise money. So why pray tell are we not hearing the administration explain why we did not invade Pakistan, which, by the way, has been the primary home for these guys all along. Pakistan which does have nukes and does not have oil. But they do have a dictatorship, but that’s OK because he pretends to like us. Pakistan, which does not want us poking around in their northern mountains looking for Osama because oh, it might disturb the locals.

    But back to economics… Wish I was in Vail Barry. How’s the weather? Can you find Ken Lay’s house among the 5-15m vacation cabins that wind up the hill from Beaver Creek?

  16. Craig says:

    I think it’s saddest of all that our government has so little crediibility that the citizenry can’t trust anything it does or says, and neither can the rest of the world, right or wrong.

    When Henny Penny lost all cred it was over. Same here. It doesn’t matter if they are right! They have to go.

    When our safety is at risk due to lost credibility, there is only one choice.

    I would note that Bush’s headline was “We are at war with Islamic Facsists”. Couldn’t the Al Jazeera headline be the same? “We are at war with Christian Facsists”?

    “They want to kill us for our freedom” (WHAT?)
    “They want to kill us for our oil”.

    Which one makes more sense?

    I think they want to kill us because we are killing THEM for (to control their) oil and we’ve been killing them for some time now. THAT motivation makes more sense to me.

    Killing someone because they are free is NOT a logical motivation. Killing someone because they are “free” to do anything they wish to you and your children/family/people/country? NOW THERE is a logical motivation.