It seems that in the latest development in TWAT and The War Against Liquids, the forces that be have turned their beady little eyes to the tiny terrorist known as Harry Potter.
American airport staff almost stopped Harry Potter author JK Rowling boarding a flight because she would not part with the manuscript for the final book.
Rowling was not prepared to stow her top secret notes for book number seven in her check-in baggage when she flew back from a book festival in August.
Eventually she was allowed to take them on the flight, bound in elastic bands.
Indeed, if that manuscript fell into the hands of terrorists, what havoc could they create? Unimaginable, worldwide suffering would invariably follow the manuscript-napping.
But seriously, what was she going to do? Use it to threaten the pilot? “Turn this plane around NOW and land in Havana or Hermione gets written out!“
raincoaster 
“Eventually she was allowed to take them on the flight, bound in elastic bands.”
As with her books, a disappointment. Had I been the author she would have been stood up against a wall and riddled with bullets.
I’m confused about the elastic bands. Are only books in bondage acceptable? Or were the brads considered “edged weapons” or something?
I can’t hate her too much; it’s nice to see someone become a billionaire just by writing some books. And at least they’re not solid crap like The Corrections. As well, anyone who inspires that much fun fanfic has a special place in my heart (behind the fridge).
Terrorism isn’t the only thing they stop at airports, you know. They also try to prevent piracy.
It’s still funny that they suspected J.K. Rowling of trying to pirate her own book.
Piracy? It was hand-written, you know. Any pirate who would go to that much trouble is a pirate who deserves to get away with it.
And my father worked at airports for forty years and I don’t recall him ever mentioning that they were a bastion in the fight against piracy.
I practically *live* at airports. I’ve been stopped several times, especially when doing international flights.
And it’s a far more plausible reason for stopping Harry Potter #7’s draft than terrorism. Either way, the guys who stopped her were stupid.
Papers? Handwritten papers? Seriously, I’m not seeing the piracy link there.
It’s the author’s copy of Harry Potter #7. If they were given to a third-party publisher early, the black market would jump all over them.
hahaa..this is very ridiculous..dont know fi i should laugh or cry..the airport authority for making such a fuss and JK rowling for making a bigger fusss…why couldnt she just keep it in her baggage?! oh yeah, the baggage might get lost and then her precious manuscript will be out….forgot about that!
It would NOT be a good thing if she put it in her luggage. It’d be stolen or lost immediately.
And Shadow, I’m still not getting it. Yes, it was the author’s copy of Harry Potter #7, and yes, it’s worth a ton on the black market, but in no way would forcing JK Rowling to give up the manuscript prevent piracy. She IS the author. It couldn’t be safer than with her.
Besides, I think the main point of the article, once you strip away the celeb factor, is that you’re not even allowed to bring paper onboard a plane anymore. I guess it’s in case you threaten to papercut the crew or something. It’s gone completely crazy and it is nothing but arbitrary and fascist.
Nobody is going to think it’s a terrorist weapon either. It’s more likely they’re just being far too bureaucratic on anti-piracy laws than thinking a stack of handwritten papers is a terrorist weapon.
all of you are lloking past the obvious…the reason they didnt want her to bring the copy on the plane is because they though that if they let one person on the plane with paper, then they have to let everyone bring paper on the plane, and you know as well as i do, that no matter who it is bringing their book on the plane, some ass hole is gonna complain about it…..even if it is the one with the paper is Joanna Kathleen Rowling herself.
But, they let her on with her underwear. Next thing, they’re going to have to let everybody on with their underwear…
There IS no security directive saying you can’t take a manuscript or book onto a flight.
I agree that the restrictions on traveling are a bit out of control but there IS a security directive wrt books….
“Those measures meant people were unable to board planes with things such as laptops, liquids and even books.”
I read this at: http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/09/14/rowling-security-manuscript.html
I believe those security restrictions on books have been removed. Heathrow has no restrictions on books (http://www.heathrowairport.com/assets/B2CPortal/Static%20Files/Permitted_and_not_permitted_items.txt) and the Transportation Security Administration in the US says they also have no such restrictions (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/14/AR2006091400616.html?nav=rss_artsandliving/entertainmentnews).
So what we have here is somebody who got overzealous and started making up rules, and a LOT of editors who didn’t fact-check the wire copy before running it.