Where are the airlines? Why is there not an outcry from the ones whose business, whose customer base, is directly violated by the TSA (Terrorist Society of America?) photogropers? How can they expect to remain in business if they surrender to this government excess, which will lead to government control over Americans' ability to travel where and when they want? It is outrageous to me that the airlines have planted their heads in ..... the sand.

That's a good question JC. Neither I nor any of mine will be or have been flying since 9/11. It is not due to any fear of terrorists but only to the restrictions imposed and violation of rights executed at the airport. We just drive anywhere we want or need to go. Takes more time of which I deem is worth the cost as there is no time or dollar amount that makes up for the least bit of liberty lost.

The biggest travel day of the year (the Wednesday before Thanksgiving) would have been a tempting target for terrorists. That TSA could take the scanners offline simply for political reasons (to deny the "Opt Out Day" organizers their visual of long lines and angry travelers) demonstrated what many people already know: that they, like most of the TSA's "security measures" are just for show, mere "security theater."

Only two things have changed since 9-11 to truly improve airline security. The first is the new policy to lock the reinforced cockpit doors, preventing anyone from taking unauthorized control of the plane. The other is increased vigilance on the part of the passengers, who are now aware that a hijacking may lead to much worse than an unscheduled trip to Havana. This began even before the morning of September 11 was over, when the passengers on Flight 93, having heard what was happening on other flights, fought back and prevented (at the cost of their lives) that plane from being flown into the Capital.

Since that day, anyone who tried to take over a plane with anything as laughable as a box cutter (never mind fingernail clippers) would likely be released to the authorities in "damaged condition."

Unfortunately, TSA's procedures always seem to react to the last tactic tried by Islamists. One bomber tries to detonate his shoes, and so now we must all go barefoot. Another bomber attempts liquid explosives, so young mothers are harrassed over bottles of breast milk. PETN hidden in underwear leads to the PornoScan 2010 and the "Gate Rape" grope (though it is questionable whether either would have detected his bomb.)

But while TSA procedures are always cumulative, the terrorists have shown a remarkable agility, never using the same tactic twice. One wonders how long until TSA addresses the threat that was revealed by the attempted assassination last year of a Saudi king by a bomber with a bomb secreted in his rectum. How many nuns, wheelchair-bound grandmothers, and screaming toddlers will be given forced proctological "inspections" in the name of "safety?"

Even the screening of an ever-expanding "No Fly" list is easily evaded, even assuming the terrorist is on the list. When a reservation is made, the TSA gets the information for the person who was issued the credit that's used to pay for the ticket, and whose name is on the reservation. It's this name that is compared to FBI and CIA watch lists. If Achmed Mohammed's terror cell steals the card from Bob Smith (who is not a terrorist) and makes the reservation in Bob Smith's name, no red flags go up.

Next, the terrorist gins up a fake boarding pass with his actual name, that matches his actual ID. When he approcahes Security, the TSA agent only VISUALLY checks to make sure they match; the name is not checked against no-fly lists at this point, and the pass is not entered into the system to make sure it's real. Achmed looks like the photo on his driver's license, and "Achmed" is spelled the same on both the license and the boarding pass? "Go right ahead sir." (Unfortunately, even if he is selected for enhanced screening, the "enhanced security" will miss the PETN bomb he has stuffed up his rectum.)

The final step is for the bomber to go on to his gate, with a quick stop in the bathroom to flush the faked "Achmed" boarding pass. He presents the airline-issued boarding pass at the gate for scanning, and "Mr. Smith" goes right aboard.

Frighteningly simple, isn't it? Of course, if TSA isn't even going to catch it when someone who IS on their list, who uses his real red-flagged name to buy a one-way ticket with cash, and whose own diplomat father warns the US Embassy that his son has become a terrorist (like the "underwear bomber") not even these simple steps are necessary.

What would work? Intelligent risk assessment (not "profiling") that looks for behavioral clues that something is awry. Each passenger (not just a random and politically-correct sample) is briefly questioned, or merely observed. Those who raise no suspicion go on their way; others are subjected to further scrutiny. The Israelis have used it for decades, and not one El Al flight has been hijacked since.

What else would help? Bomb-sniffing dogs, which cost $8500 each, and are better at detecting explosives than $150,000 back-scatter xrays, not to mention being less of a violation of our Fourth Amendment rights. Our front-line troops, who encounter IEDs on a daily basis, use them in Iraq and Afghanistan; why shouldn't we?

Michael Chertoff, the past head of Homeland Security, is now employed by the company that makes those controversial scanners. And thousands of unskilled and poorly-educated TSA employees, who in the current economy would likely be among the unemployed, owe the fact that they even have jobs to Congressional Democrats.

Is it any wonder why we're being subjected to unconstitutional indignities that don't even enhance our security?

I am concerned for the security

of our great Nation, not so much

because of any threat from without,

but because of the insidious forces

working from within.---Douglas MacArthur

(1880-1964)

P3Orion, you have hit all the nails on the heads. I worked with law enforcement in South Florida against drug smuggling. The dogs never lied, even when the cops failed to find the drugs. As long as the dog said the drugs were there, the cops worked until they located the drugs, often very cleverly concealed. A couple of sniffs from a nice friendly Lab are far less objectionable than letting some stranger ogle my wife's body, or grope my teenaged sons. Intelligent risk assessment (which we have loosely called profiling), is the backup to the bomb sniffing dogs. It does not take a rocket scientist to stop the problem. It does take a modicum of common sense, of which the current and past administrations seems fairly devoid.

Thanks Bo. Unfortunately, I don't think it's a matter of common sense (or the lack thereof) in the current administration, but of priorities. They clearly place a much higher value on the tender sensibilities of foreign Muslim governments than on the safety of American citizens.

Thanks Bo. Unfortunately, I don't think it's a matter of common sense (or the lack thereof) in the current administration, but of priorities. They clearly place a much higher value on the tender sensibilities of foreign Muslim governments than on the safety of American citizens.